The Greens seem to have gotten a lot of signs up in the last week. It's hard to say if they're pulling more from the NDP or Libs in this riding - though certainly national polls suggest the latter.

Olivia Chow has a lot of signs, but not as many as Rosario Marchese did provincially - you'd think he was the only candidate on the ballot!

It will be interesting to see on election day how much signs matter - certainly the federal Libs are in much worse shape than their provincial counterparts and have lost ground - so based on trends we shouldn't expect Innes to do any better than Holloway did, percentage wise.

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by Uncle John:
Signs don't vote

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
....from what I've heard, what it usually indicates is that the homeowner just says "yes" to each party that asks them to put a sign up if they're not particularly partisan.

---

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by JimWaterloo:
Do signs affect voter decision?

---

We intentionally didn't waste money on signs mixing generic signs from head office with personal campaign signs. I even argued using only generic signs to avoid waste but was overruled.

So I'm happy to let the liberals or ndp win the sign war. Strategic placement in certain areas helps but doesn't influence the outcome. There's over 80,000 voters and I doubt there are enough signs anywhere to make a difference.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mimeguy:

Status quo media reporting is a much bigger problem than not having enough signs.

---

Of course.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]

I guess I just figure NDP people can't take criticism. Nor do they listen. Why vote for that?

I am crossing my fingers it is a tight race, and with the Green Party running strong in this riding it could be tight. Even better if Chow goes down by a single vote.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Funny thing about those Innes signs. They sure look orange to me. That's supposed to be a trustworthy campaign.

Hm.

That doesn't make much sense. Are you quite sure you weren't going to vote Liberal anyway, and aren't using this as an excuse to tell all and sundry that they're big ol' meanieheads because you're doing what you were going to do all along?

For example, this kind of bullshit:

quote:

---

sure you weren't going to vote Liberal anyway, and aren't using this as an excuse to tell all and sundry that they're big ol' meanieheads because you're doing what you were going to do all along?

---

Never voted Liberal in my life. Never even considered it. I am on record as a vocal Chow supporter, on this site variously.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Based on that I am really a CHP activist out to Christianize the world.

But there you go, you reap what you sow.

Some posters have had their accounts suspended, because they can't stop slinging crap like this.

I don't know who they think they are winning over.

However, being the type to spend far too much time on the Internet, I've certainly seen far too many dramatic flourishes along the lines of "you all suck so I'm going to do exactly what you don't want me to do!", many of which I suspect - I don't know - are really nothing more than a "nyah, nyah" response to equally vacuous digs.

EDIT: Also the "well I don't really care anyway" post...

And also, being the type to spend far too much time on the Internet, I certainly admit I've taken Internet forum yammering far too seriously in my time, and the thought of actually making a serious decision based on Intarweb arguin' seems kinda silly.

Also also, I have a well-muscled swimmer's build, a seven-figure income, and a PhD in Gettin' it On.*

* Only one of these is true, and that only if you count the numerals to the right of the decimal point.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Erstwhile ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erstwhile:
For the record, I don't have a horse in this race. I couldn't honestly care less how Cueball votes.

However, being the type to spend far too much time on the Internet, I've certainly seen far too many dramatic flourishes along the lines of "you all suck so I'm going to do exactly what you don't want me to do!", many of which I suspect - I don't know - are really nothing more than a "nyah, nyah" response to equally vacuous digs.

EDIT: Also the "well I don't really care anyway" post...

And also, being the type to spend far too much time on the Internet, I certainly admit I've taken Internet forum yammering far too seriously in my time, and the thought of actually making a serious decision based on Intarweb arguin' seems kinda silly.

Also also, I have a well-muscled swimmer's build, a seven-figure income, and a PhD in Gettin' it On.*

* Only one of these is true, and that only if you count the numerals to the right of the decimal point.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Erstwhile ]

---

Right, and you are saying this without have a clue what I think and believe, though I have stated what I think and believe so many times here that it is not even funny.

"Your problem, Barton, is that You Do NOT listen".

You think in entirely partisan bi-linear constructs of opposites, like George Bush; "if you are not with us, you are with the Liberals". There is nothing I detest more than that.

You merely had to read my posts to find out that nothing I think has any correlation with Liberal party ideas. Nor does it have much to do with the NDP, anymore.

So, now I have decided that the only way to get rid of the pseudo-left NDP is to try and erradicate it. And the best way to erradicate it is to vote against it.

Then perhaps something with a tangible "left" focus might emerge. I will be voting strategically.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
[QB]

Right, and you are saying this without have a clue what I think and believe, ...

You think in entirely partisan bi-linear constructs of opposites, like George Bush;

---

Back atcha, buddy.

I don't know what you've written in the past and honestly I don't care...what you said in this thread, however, is:

quote:

---

I am with Atwood and I am voting for Innes, Fidel, North Report and a few of the other sychophants finally convinced me too.

After months of being told I hate the NDP and being called a Liberal because I criticize their position, I figure I might as well.

I guess I just figure NDP people can't take criticism. Nor do they listen. Why vote for that?

---

No mention of strategic voting. No mention of eradicating the NDP to "save the Left". No, you're voting Liberal because Rabble's full of doo-doo heads and you'll show 'em, by gum. If you don't want to be held to account for what you, y'know, actually say? Then say what you actually mean.

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
Hopefully the ONDP did, though. I wouldn't bet on it, however.

---

No they haven't. They do the same thing as Rae -take credit for "good things" but blame Rae for being "fiscally irresponsible" just as Rae takes credit for the "good things" but blames the "party he was stuck with" for being "fiscally irresponsible."

One of the most annoying things in the last election was how Hampton, a Cabinet minister in the Rae govt., saying how "we knew Rae was a Liberal all along."

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
I am with Atwood and I am voting for Innes, Fidel, North Report and a few of the other sychophants finally convinced me too. After months of being told I hate the NDP and being called a Liberal because I criticize their position, I figure I might as well.

I guess I just figure NDP people can't take criticism. Nor do they listen. Why vote for that?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erstwhile:
Back atcha, buddy.

I don't know what you've written in the past and honestly I don't care...what you said in this thread, however, is:

---

No. I personally think that with NAFTA and creation of the international free trade agreements, and the assertion of neo-liberalism as the de facto ruling ideology that institutions like parliment no longer had a direct legal mechanism with which to control, or intervene in the economy, since that control has been vested in international trade organizations, and legal bodies that beyond the control of local democratic structures.

As such the agendas of all parties are confined to a very specific and limited set of possibilities, that have been set up to purposely exclude any kind of state management, or intervention in the economy beyond cosmetic adjustement: It would be impossible, under the present structure of how power is managed for a party to actually "rule from the left," because parliment is no longer empowered to do so.

Therefore "cap and trade," to encourage industries to comply, as opposed to legally sanctioning them with non-compliance.

So therefore, it does not matter which party I vote for since all I am voting for, or against, are cosmetic adjustments around so called "social issues," such as indpendent religious school boards v. a unified secular school board.

Then of course, there are the "doo doo heads" who think that saying things such as the above amount to being a Liberal, so why the fuck not, since Laytone et al would simply back down on any positive social agenda they promise, when the reality of the limits of parlimentary power they seek became apparent, as has every single provincial NDP government, for the last 20 years.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
No. I personally think that with NAFTA and creation of the international free trade agreements, and the assertion of neo-liberalism as the de facto ruling ideology that institutions like parliment no longer had a direct legal mechanism with which to control, or intervene in the economy, since that control has been vested in international trade organizations, and legal bodies that beyond the control of local democratic structures.

As such the agendas of all parties are confined to a very specific and limited set of possibilities, that have been set up to purposely exclude any kind of state management, or intervention in the economy beyond cosmetic adjustement. Therefore, it would be impossible, under the present structure of how power is managed for a party to actually "rule from the left," because parliment is no longer empowered to do so.

---

Well said (would you be able to write my SSHRC application for me? Social democrats everywhere have either embraced neoliberalism or at least can't fight effectively against it.

I still support the NDP though because it is a working class political tendency which will yes make neoliberalism somewhat more humane and hold back some of its most destructive effects. The Liberals are a party of the corporate elite, pure and simple and govern like the old PC's in power.

Ever heard the expression "cutting off your nose to spite your face"???

And all this constant "deflection" about blaming the Liberals, as opposed to answering the critique is precisely the kind of shit I dispise.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
Okay. Please stop the pile on. I have seen people slag Cueball as a Liberal (etc.) more than a few times. It is stupid to do, and groundless. I have said so more than a few times.

Some posters have had their accounts suspended, because they can't stop slinging crap like this.

I don't know who they think they are winning over.

This being a democracy and all, Cueball is free to vote how he wishes, for whatever reason. I say this as a member of the NDP. Imagine!

---

That's not convincing. That is irritating. Thanks for nothing. If I want bullshit, I can get if from the real Liberals. The fact that it is spewed here day in day out, just convinces me more in the essential corruption of the institution.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

All that matters is wether or not I make nicey-nicey with Layton, and don't point out that his Defence Critic is backsliding on NDP promises, and she is not anywhere even near power.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

How was it "stupid"?

I can see you are really working hard at giving Innes my vote with the 12 year old clevland crap. Losing one vote at a time, that is the spirit!

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
The Liberals are the party that gave us NAFTA, the SPP and have always been the most pro-free trade pro-business party.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Exactly the kind of deflective crap that does not in any way shape or form respond to the critique, except by pointing at the other guy, that is essence of the corruption in your party.

---

Pierre Fortin and Industry Canada said that in a comparison of aggregate economic performances of 35 or 40 industrialized countries in the decade of the 90's, Canada's economy performed about the worst. Chretien and Martin put unnecessary debt payment to banksters ahead of the interests of Canadian families. And Martin, Manley and company resisted our auditor general's demands to stop cooking federal accounting books until the 2000's.

Canada's Liberal government were little more than warmongering plutocrats stooging for Crazy George II from 2002 to crash and burn in 2006.

And the Liberals were arrogant as well as corrupt through most of it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
And here I thought this was about you teaching the evil NDP a thing or two by voting Liberal in a thread about a specific riding. Instead you want a discussion on trade issues. If that is the case, how be you start a thread, with no castigating remarks and see where that goes.
If you really want a discussion you constant attacking of others or the organizations they belong to than behaving as you do is very much stupid. Since I don't beleive that is what you want anyway than keep on truckin

---

What? You come here day in and day out "attacking of others and the organizations they belong to", but if someone does that to the NDP, oh my my my, that is sin. I guess that means that you don't really want a "discussion" either.

That is more or less my point. NDP'rs act as if they own the board and all posters have to go through some kind of hazing process, if they don't lock step with THE party, they get abused, called "Liberals" or whatever.

You weren't actually interested in any kind of discussion, because in fact I have made the above point numerously on many occassions, but today it seems for the first time you actually read it.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
What? You come here day in and day out "attacking of others and the organizations they belong to", but if someone does that to the NDP, oh my my my, that is sin.

---

I presume this was addressed at me, and I call bullshit and thank you as well for proving my dish it out observation.

I am critical of everyone, including the NDP. If I am less critical of the NDP it is only because that partisan organization alligns more directly to my world view. I will also challenge those who attack the NDP without a shred of evidence, credibility and with out right lies. Sorry it offends you that I might actually stand up for what I believe in, instead of being a couch potato quarterback.
I have never, nor do I attack people or their views, just because they differ from me. I might counter them, but that is called debate and conversation, something you seem to need some help with.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Bookish Agrarian ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
Okay. Please stop the pile on. I have seen people slag Cueball as a Liberal (etc.) more than a few times. It is stupid to do, and groundless. I have said so more than a few times.

Some posters have had their accounts suspended, because they can't stop slinging crap like this.

I don't know who they think they are winning over.

This being a democracy and all, Cueball is free to vote how he wishes, for whatever reason. I say this as a member of the NDP. Imagine!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
You think that voting for the NDP is standing up for what you believe in? I say it contributing to the dellusion that it might do something.

---

Did I say voting NDP is standing up for what I believe in. If so please show me. Otherwise it is just another attempt at deflection.

Wah Wah Nobody likes me, every body hates me
I am going to the garden to eat worms.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coyote:
I agree with writer. cueball has the right to exercise his franchise as he sees fit, for the reasons that he sees fit to do so.

The vitriol here serves no good purpose.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Meh fuck you. This is what I am saying. I am saying my interactions with NDP'rs on this web site has in fact made me hate the NDP. And I do.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

I am tired of this culture of entitlement.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

[One] has the right to vote how he wants, [One] does not have the right to treat all [insert party of preference here] babblers in terms that suggest [they] are all corrupt fakes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
The NDP is a corrupt fake left party. I have every right to say that. But you seem to think that your stupid orange lawns sign gives you some kind of special privilege here.

I am tired of this culture of entitlement.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

You are free to believe what you like, but don't cry when you make statements like that and someone has the gall to actually challenge you on a discussion board that is built to allow that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Interested Observer:

QFT

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

You are free to believe what you like, but don't cry when you make statements like that and someone has the gall to actually challenge you on a discussion board that is built to allow that.

You really are reminding me of a child. A younger child that torrments an older sibling, bugging them and bugging them to get them to react and when they do go crying to Mommy or Daddy about how mean they are and that you had no idea why they got mad like that. You are so obvious it is hilarious.

---

Fuck you. What's so hard to underatand about that.

I made an arguement, I asked you to respond to it, you basically told me you weren't interested in discussing it, and now you have degenerated into a series of personal insults.

So, go fuck yourself. And fuck your gleeclub "party" too.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Interested Observer:

QFT

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

no idea what that means

---

Quote For Truth

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

[One] has the right to vote how he wants, [One] does not have the right to treat all [insert party of preference here] babblers in terms that suggest [they] are all corrupt fakes.

---

NDP'rs do this all the time, to anyone who does not agree with them basically. But there is a culture of entitlement here, where NDP'rs feel they can do this to others, but seem to feel otherwise when they are the target.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

no idea what that means

---

It means Quoted For Truth and the altering of your words seems to indicate that what you were saying could be said better?

I'm NDP and object to some of Cueball's tactics here but I saw Cueball taking plenty the other day, so I get his frustration.

For me, I see the NDP selling out a bit too but it seems to be working. The electorate is taking them more seriously, that needs to be taken into account. I'm not happy that's the fact but still see the NDP as the only means to an end.

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

I am tired of this culture of entitlement.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:
If this doesn't stop I'm going to post the results for each poll in the last federal election in Trinity-Spadina riding, one per thread.

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

---

quote:

---

The only sign that probably would be appropriate is one that says Liberal supporter Cueball hates the NDP.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

Then you must abandon the entitlement party and vote NDP! The more the merrier.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
The other day I asked who the other candidates in Trinity Spadina and some jackass came along and said:

---

So that means that everyone is the NDP is bad? Don't you see how silly that is. Christ on a stick if I hated every party that has an asshole or two in it, I would be down to only liking the Natural Law Party and maybe not even them.

For the record I think comments like that are wrong and childish Cueball, but so are comments demeaning every babbler who supports the NDP by the actions of a few others and pretending no one who is a member of or supports the NDP ever critical of it

NDP 96
LIB 82
GRN 9
CPC 6

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

So that means that everyone is the NDP is bad? Don't you see how silly that is. Christ on a stick if I hated every party that has an asshole or two in it, I would be down to only liking the Natural Law Party and maybe not even them.

---

I only began to say that the people in the NDP were bad when they began to abuse me on the internet. For example this theme that I "hate" the NDP was started the other day by that Kropotkin fellow. Now in which thread where, did I say I hate the NDP, ever?

Variously, a bunch of newbies picked up on this theme, to the point where I post a question about independent candidates in my riding who might be interesting, and the first thing that comes my way is this shitty "Liberal supporter Cueball hates the NDP."

Then of course their is the repetition of the "liberal" smear. I really have had enough of it.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

But my exposure to the culture of the NDP is largely through this board

---

The NDP has about 80,000 card-carrying members across Canada - half a dozen of whom post regularly in babble (including yours truly).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
T'ain't that true of almost ever board of every descriptions on the internet. I am sure there is some kind of bizarre hazing ritual on Barbie collector web boards and no doubt there is some of that going on on sites dedicated to discussion of flower arranging. It is the nature of the beast in some ways.

---

Well, there doesn't seem to much "new" or "democratic" about hazing and smearing.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Anyway I have made up my mind. I'll vote for the people with the red signs. At least they are red.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

At least they are red

---

quote:

---

Is it me or is everybody on this site that does not 100% support whatever is the current NDP position on a particular issue, automatically considered a Liberal?

---

quote:

---

At least they are red

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erik Redburn:
Cueball just has an irrational hatred for the NDP, common amongst radicals who never dare go as far as doing their own organizing or homework.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
Again you are smearing every New Democrat on babble, by claiming that we are all hazing and smearing and that this is NDP culture. You have no evidence of that and you cannot make that claim based on a handful of anonymous posters. It is like saying all ice cream sucks because I had a bad experience with one tub of chunky monkey.

---

I don't see him as smearing every dipper on babble.

There are those that don't automatically attack the credibility of the poster for not sharing their point of view.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erik Redburn:
Cueball just has an irrational hatred for the NDP, common amongst radicals who never dare go as far as doing their own organizing or homework.

---

It would be funny seeing Jack holding a conservative party sign early Saturday morning.

please stop acting like a total arse by opening multiple pointless threads. could you please confine yourself to either making your point or venting in just one?

[Edited to correct MY mistake. I initially incorrectly addressed this to Cueball instead of Interested Observor. I have corrected this and apologized to Cueball.]

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: bagkitty ]

But yeah, come after me, why not?

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

I have to say that your tarring of an entire party based on a few people is harder to respect. I have found that there is quite a variety of NDP supporters here including those who will support everything the party does blindly and rudely and those, like myself, who criticize it quite often even though I believe that it is the best of the available options.

I don't like being included in your description of NDPers here just by an association to the party that some 18-22% of Canadians hold. I think about every policy I support and do not support things just because a party I support does. You can read my comments even in this election where it is clear that I am an NDP supporter but had no problem criticizing the party for its original position on May being in the debates for example.

I sometimes disagree with you sometimes agree-- I realize you write with passion and I like that. However, I also find that very often you come out very sarcastically and aggressively and this invites the same in return from those who happen not to agree with you. On occasion that has included me.

I do believe a good party is one you can fight with at times and where passion has a place. I do not agree with your suggestion that the NDP has one mind or one character -- it is a party where unity is often difficult to achieve. I have found there are people here who claim to be NDPers who I respect immensely while there are others who drive me up the wall with their blind loyalty.

As far as leaving the NDP to go to the Liberals because the NDP is petty and small, I have a personal reaction. The Liberals are the party that had Warren Kinsella go to Vancouver to buy dirt on Kim Campbell from her school friends- this was reported publicly. He did this after going to Dennis Buekert who was an author I was working with at the time and ask him not to do business with me because of a dispute I had with the Liberal party. This is the party that sent a letter to all their MPs and Senators including my own MP demanding that they not reply to me rather than address the issues I was raising (even the Ottawa Citizen which was Liberal at the time had to comment on that disgusting anti-democratic crap). This was the party that I heard asked local Ottawa bookstores to stop buying my publishing company's books because I had a lawsuit against them.

So if you are leaving the NDP and going to the Liberals because they are a party of principle-- there are many public stories about their vindictiveness and pettiness-- good luck.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:
Cueball, as one who has argued both on your side and against you, I can easily respect your decision to vote as you wish and to declare that decision publicly.

I have to say that your tarring of an entire party based on a few people is harder to respect. I have found that there is quite a variety of NDP supporters here including those who will support everything the party does blindly and rudely and those, like myself, who criticize it quite often even though I believe that it is the best of the available options.

I don't like being included in your description of NDPers here just by an association to the party that some 18-22% of Canadians hold. I think about every policy I support and do not support things just because a party I support does. You can read my comments even in this election where it is clear that I am an NDP supporter but had no problem criticizing the party for its original position on May being in the debates for example.

I sometimes disagree with you sometimes agree-- I realize you write with passion and I like that. However, I also find that very often you come out very sarcastically and aggressively and this invites the same in return from those who happen not to agree with you. On occasion that has included me.

I do believe a good party is one you can fight with at times and where passion has a place. I do not agree with your suggestion that the NDP has one mind or one character -- it is a party where unity is often difficult to achieve. I have found there are people here who claim to be NDPers who I respect immensely while there are others who drive me up the wall with their blind loyalty.

As far as leaving the NDP to go to the Liberals because the NDP is petty and small, I have a personal reaction. The Liberals are the party that had Warren Kinsella go to Vancouver to buy dirt on Kim Campbell from her school friends- this was reported publicly. He did this after going to Dennis Buekert who was an author I was working with at the time and ask him not to do business with me because of a dispute I had with the Liberal party. This is the party that sent a letter to all their MPs and Senators including my own MP demanding that they not reply to me rather than address the issues I was raising (even the Ottawa Citizen which was Liberal at the time had to comment on that disgusting anti-democratic crap). This was the party that I heard asked local Ottawa bookstores to stop buying my publishing company's books because I had a lawsuit against them.

So if you are leaving the NDP and going to the Liberals because they are a party of principle-- there are many public stories about their vindictiveness and pettiness-- good luck.

I have another personal reaction-- there is a person at work who speaks very well of me-- but the support is so overwhelming and so overdone that it is embarrassing to me and I believe it hurts me in my job. I do not accept responsibility for what one person who has the best intentions does for me that in the end becomes very unhelpful and I do not hold the NDP accountable for the excesses or rudeness of each person who happens to claim to be a supporter. Fairly, I do not judge the Liberals and the Cons either based on that-- to judge a party based on a person, that person should be at least in the employ of the party if not the leader.
Put differently the person you judge the party by should be one endorsed by the party not a person who merely endorses the party. And if you hate the NDP because you hate me-- that falls into the same category-- I passed no test when I made my donation and got my card.

---

I don't mind sarcasm, or anger, or any of those things however, outright hazing and smearing is another thing entirely.

So, please tell me what is "new" and "democratic" about this statement:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erik Redburn:
Cueball just has an irrational hatred for the NDP, common amongst radicals who never dare go as far as doing their own organizing or homework.

---

Funnily enough the idea that I am a communist, or some other kind of radical alternates with the idea that I am a Liberal.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
T'ain't that true of almost ever board of every descriptions on the internet. I am sure there is some kind of bizarre hazing ritual on Barbie collector web boards and no doubt there is some of that going on on sites dedicated to discussion of flower arranging. It is the nature of the beast in some ways.

---

What you are speaking of is territoriality, and all humans do it, to a greater or lesser degree. And one does not find it on just message boards, it permiates society, which is why urban settings have enclaves and rural areas have a predominant culture. The physical territoriality that we live within in society comes along with us, everywhere we go.

And people guard their territory, or perceived territory, vigilantly, though on a sliding scale based upon individual proclivities to do so.

Now "progressives" are theoretically supposed to have an open territory, and be all encompassing. I would argue that it is not possible, to do so to any great extent, as the persons that combine or constitute the "progressive movement" participate from their own personal territorial affilitation.

Ontario persons have their own conceptual frame of reference, as opposed to Atlantic Canadians, PQers and BCers, as do the other regions with each other. Then we get down into regional differences and territoriality, which sets up a whole other framework of progressive actions being driven from yet another "territory".

All these overlap, intersect and diverge, while being an organic whole, at the same time. As such, I believe we over burden ourselves by holding a false belief that we are beyond "divisions". We aren't, other people aren't, nor we will any of us be in the near future.

It is a dream of social justice and equality that we are still working towards, if indeed it is even possible, seeing as how it appears to be, as yet anyway, an instinctual expression.

Moreover, some people use this progressive naivety, that we are supposed to be perfect "progressives", and above the frey, as a weapon. Why does it work? Because we believe we are failing in our strivations, we aren't and we need to get passed this false notion that we should be beyond the frey so far as to not be what? Human?

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
Well if you'd just switchover to the dark side, maybe they'd stop making your life a living hell? Just a thought.

---

Exactly. You guys are just sucking the life out of this place.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

Exactly. You guys are just sucking the life out of this place.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erik Redburn:
Cueball just has an irrational hatred for the NDP, common amongst radicals who never dare go as far as doing their own organizing or homework.

---

As I have stated, many times, I find this kind of behaviour shameful. I asked that a pile on not happen, but some continue to see some use in such bullying behaviour.

Shameful.

Shameful.

And please, don't waste my time claiming that cueball asked for it / provoked it. Tedious, unimaginative, lazy, and shameful.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: writer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

Comments?

---

Why do you ask others for comments-- do you need us to say we are not Erik Redburn and that his comment was his own and that he did not run his comment past the NDP leadership? Do you need us to tell you what he said was not a collective NDP opinion? Dare I say there is absolutely no collective NDP opinion about you? What are you going to do when you come across a Liberal you think is an asshole-- go party shopping again? It is this idea that you want to hold people responsible for the opinions and behaviour of others how is that democratic.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
Cueball, have you sent a complaint to the moderators: [email protected]? That's usually how it works, if you want the attention of the mods.

As I have stated, many times, I find this kind of behaviour shameful. I asked that a pile on not happen, but some continue to see some use in such bullying behaviour.

Shameful.

Shameful.

And please, don't waste my time claiming that cueball asked for it / provoked it. Tedious, unimaginative, lazy, and shameful.

---

Cueball was just amazed that nobody had anything to say about his treatment by Erik specifically and that nobody speaking up about it is kinda like a tepid endorsement of the process.

However, obviously some people had something to say. The overall culture here seems to think it's normal.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Interested Observer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:

Easy to say pile on-- I think this is a reaction-- I am not sure that all reactions are the same. My comments come here without any attempt to wound cueball here-- but to defend an attack against a whole group based on the behaviour of a few-- why do you think it is shameful to do that?
I agree some of the comments to Cueball here are unfair but lets not do the same on the other side that he is doing and paint everyone with the same brush. People are writing individual comments here because there is not a group think and we do not share identical thoughts. You should expect reaction when you post publicly and that reaction should be respectful-- some of it has been and some has not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
Cueball, have you sent a complaint to the moderators: [email protected]? That's usually how it works, if you want the attention of the mods.

As I have stated, many times, I find this kind of behaviour shameful. I asked that a pile on not happen, but some continue to see some use in such bullying behaviour.

Shameful.

Shameful.

And please, don't waste my time claiming that cueball asked for it / provoked it. Tedious, unimaginative, lazy, and shameful.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erik Redburn:

Yawn is right. Whats tedious is people who let bully boys like Cueball roam free attacking others then allow him to turn and around and whine when someone calls him on it. His irrational hatred of the NDP is self evident, and if the moderators are going to be called in then I want a chance to demonstrate the actual posting history. A "progressive" site shouldn't allow any one party free reign, not when they use it to attack others. Fair is fair.

---

What party are you referring too Erik?

See, if I disagree with the NDP, its either Reds under the beds, or Liberal schills.

Really sad and depressing, and none of that has anything to do with any kind of politics that I want to have anything to do with.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

However, I am a part of it now when cueball says that this is some kind of predominant NDP culture that since I identified as an NDP supporter I am tarred with. Why is it considered piling on when I object to being associated with an out-of context comment I have no part of? And how fair is it for me to go very far in discussing that comment when I have no idea where it comes from-- beyond saying this is not a reflection of any more than one person's opinion from one day in one context.

Anyway, realize I got it wrong earlier. Messages should go to [email protected]

I've sent one.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: writer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
Hello? Observer? I called it shameful. Is that too subtle?

---

Sorry my post was a bit subtle. Check my edit and added emphasis.

Its about being smeared.

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
The aggressive, relentless joyful smearing is what is shameful. Just to be clear.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
BA, sorry, you don't ask someone who has been hazed for days to enter into reasoned debate after you joined a pile-on.

Whatever Cueball might be, he is human.

---

I would not have gotten involved except that his reaction was to tar everyone associated with the NDP-- on a public board before and election with a brush that not everyone could be expected to be involved with. I respectfully disagree with him.

I do not think people should be badly treated here-- but I also believe that the tone that is used by some is returned in kind and cueball at times you have been rough and have engaged in rough comments. Therefore you should expect some of that back.

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
A gang-up is a gang-up. And a group of people indulging in a gang-up, throwing baseless smears around *at an individual* is just bad, creepy, dangerous politics.

---

ETA: He also frequently insults others, even over minor differences. That too can be amply documented, by myself if given the chance (and he should have the *same* chance to documnent any complaints against me) if that is the powers that be here are truly interested in a fair "non-partisan" call. I haven't even been here much the last couple months yet the pattern continues to escalate.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Erik Redburn ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
A gang-up is a gang-up. And a group of people indulging in a gang-up, throwing baseless smears around *at an individual* is just bad, creepy, dangerous politics.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
A gang-up is a gang-up. And a group of people indulging in a gang-up, throwing baseless smears around *at an individual* is just bad, creepy, dangerous politics.

---

Wow this coming from you after the 3 way I took on sunday ...Yeah a gang up is a gang up..thanks again. Funny haven't seen Alone 30 in the last 2 days. But I was the asshole that day eh.
When you call people out on something, maybe there is a reason. See this thread as an example.

For the record I have seen contribution from Cueball on occasion, but he is provocative on a lot of threads. I don't however see him as a liberal.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: thorin_bane ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:
Okay I read up thread more and found the comment -- you want me on record saying it is out of line-- Yes it is. Yes it is disgusting-- but I also feel the same about this:
"I guess I just figure NDP people can't take criticism. Nor do they listen. Why vote for that"

That comment you made Cueball first-- wave a red flag at a bull and you get bull back.

---

Yes and this all began in the last Trinity Spadina thread where a made a point of the fact that I was disappointed that my mother was getting a "Green Party" sign, or any sign at all. Then I asked who the independent candidates were, and and some NDP schill came along to call me a "Liberal who hates the NDP", and I didn't even mention the NDP in my post.

And this behaviour of several NDP'rs (Fidel most often, then North Report, and Remind) calling me a Liberal, for many weeks now. Fidel has been repeating the trope for so long that North Report actually believes it I think. And this "Liberal" smear alternates with Erik Redburn "communist" smear that he picked up from JH. More recently Kroptokin started in on the "hatred" of the NDP schtick.

And this is the danger of the smear, some new guy like Erik, picks up on Jeff House's old commie smear, and then NR picks up on fidel's Liberal smear.

Could there be anything more bizarre? Being smeared as a Liberal, and then a Communist, practically in the same threads?

Moreso this isn't just one or two people but about 5 people offering up completely ad hominem nonsense.

Yeah, my experience is that the NDP'rs around here can't handle criticism, and when they see it they start in with the abuse.

It's just abuse.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

And there is nothing wrong with the occassional knock down drag out arguement, but constant bludgeoning with the ad hominem, does not make me want to go anywhere near the NDP.

I happen to have some very strong opinions on some very specific issues, and because I voice them in opposition to the NDP position, does not mean I hate the NDP. It means that I care about some issues very much.

I have never belonged to any party ever. So just fuck off with my private business, about my private associations.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Now there is an idea!

---

So Cueball, some of us NDP have tried to play nice but you don't seem interested?

How about some new politics?

Lets consider for example that more "social housing" was built in Ontario by the Progressive Conservatives than either the Liberals or the NDP. Go figure?

"See, if I disagree with the NDP, its either Reds under the beds, or Liberal schills. "

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Sure. Here is my idea for some new politics. Lets not talk about party affiliations, and instead talk about the ideas themselves. The only real way to make a difference is to shift the agenda overall, not obsessing about how many points each team gets.

Lets consider for example that more "social housing" was built in Ontario by the Progressive Conservatives than either the Liberals or the NDP. Go figure?

Why is that?

---

But surely you can wait a week for that???

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Well, its also a vote against you. You're politics are terrible, and have no clear principles other than some kind of odd party loyalty to a party which pretends to be from a political tradition that you disagree with, for the most part.

And all this constant "deflection" about blaming the Liberals, as opposed to answering the critique is precisely the kind of shit I dispise.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

OK cueb, sign me up. It's time for a Canadian socialist party that doesn't include liberals like Stockholm.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

Lets consider for example that more "social housing" was built in Ontario by the Progressive Conservatives than either the Liberals or the NDP. Go figure?

Why is that?

---