posted to Globe and Mail, “The resurgence of the Red Tory brand”, Lawrence Martin, 13 Aug.’09
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-resurgence-of-the-red-tory-brand/article1249800/
Harper and the Con’s moderations in position from their extreme right wing ideology discussed came only after being forced to by the Opposition and not by any kind of desire to co-operation. Their actions are only to hold onto power and not any desire to act in the best interests of Canada and all Canadians, and even to selling out Conservative Party values.
Even still, this confrontational, in-your-face, my-way-or-the-highway approach is taking its toll on our political Institutions and the general public’s confidence. It also acts a diversion as Harper and the Cons, albeit more gradually, implement their extreme right wing policies thru the Administrative Branch of the Government. It’s insidious and its dragging us back into a bygone era that has no place in a modern, diverse, tolerant and open, first world economy democratic society.
13 August, 2009
10 August, 2009
- A narrow, and/or extremist, purpose, or agenda, by its vary nature restricts individual freedom and democracy
posted to: Globe and Mail, “So, we're not a great power. Big deal – let's be a great nation”, J.L. Granatstein, 10 Aug.’09
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/so-were-not-a-great-power-big-deal-lets-be-a-great-nation/article1245345/
It seems to me that any country that is a multifaceted and diverse, tolerant, open democracy might seem “divided and diverse, unfocussed and ordinarily rudderless” to some who have a narrow and particular agenda.
However, our strength, and greatness, lies precisely in the ability to maintain a first world economy based democracy given this diversity and freedom. What other country in the history of mankind has enjoyed, or enjoys, our freedom, openness, diversity and tolerance.
A narrow, and/or extremist, purpose, or agenda, by its vary nature restricts individual freedom and democracy by imposing the will of a few on the many. This, of course, is one of the reasons Canada should be vigilant regarding extreme right wing ideologically based political parties such as Harper and the Cons.
In the current global economy this is not the end of the issue. We still must compete with countries that do have agendae, that put economic development at the forefront and do focus its people on the restricted purpose of competing and/or domination.
However, it is my firm belief that not only can Canada compete but succeed once we, as individuals, and not through the agenda of some small sector of the population or extremist government, put our minds to it. In fact, our diversity and openness, unfettered by extremist ideologies, will facilitate comprehensive, effective and imaginative solutions, thus demonstrating to the rest of the world what ‘national greatness’ really means. We merely have to “stand up and be counted”.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/so-were-not-a-great-power-big-deal-lets-be-a-great-nation/article1245345/
It seems to me that any country that is a multifaceted and diverse, tolerant, open democracy might seem “divided and diverse, unfocussed and ordinarily rudderless” to some who have a narrow and particular agenda.
However, our strength, and greatness, lies precisely in the ability to maintain a first world economy based democracy given this diversity and freedom. What other country in the history of mankind has enjoyed, or enjoys, our freedom, openness, diversity and tolerance.
A narrow, and/or extremist, purpose, or agenda, by its vary nature restricts individual freedom and democracy by imposing the will of a few on the many. This, of course, is one of the reasons Canada should be vigilant regarding extreme right wing ideologically based political parties such as Harper and the Cons.
In the current global economy this is not the end of the issue. We still must compete with countries that do have agendae, that put economic development at the forefront and do focus its people on the restricted purpose of competing and/or domination.
However, it is my firm belief that not only can Canada compete but succeed once we, as individuals, and not through the agenda of some small sector of the population or extremist government, put our minds to it. In fact, our diversity and openness, unfettered by extremist ideologies, will facilitate comprehensive, effective and imaginative solutions, thus demonstrating to the rest of the world what ‘national greatness’ really means. We merely have to “stand up and be counted”.
08 August, 2009
- One can only wonder to what extent the media (Rex is simply jumping on the band wagon) is being motivated by the ‘Noldrums [News Doldrums] of Summer
Posted to: Globe and Mail, "For pols, the livin' is never easy", Rex Murphy, 8 Aug.'09
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/for-pols-the-livin-is-never-easy/article1245339/
One can only wonder to what extent the media (Rex is simply jumping on the band wagon) is being motivated by the ‘Noldrums [=News Doldrums] of Summer’ in their demand for Ignatieff to make policy statements. Certainly Ignatieff has demonstrated that he feels it is vital to take real steps and real action to stimulate the economy. But, making press releases and statements simply so the news media can “sell papers and air time” is not necessarily in the best interests of this fair nation of ours, or the Liberal Party – both his charges.
Studied consideration of all the important factors to come up with a solution that is for the good of all and not one small sector is the name of the game, especially for Liberals:
“to build a nation where everyone can attain their potential and join together to help those that need help and protect those that need protection; through: informed, open and transparent discussion leading to a truly democratic solution for the good of all (Lloyd MacIlquham)” .
“Striking the right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus is an essential test of leadership” (John Acton). This takes time and reflection.
It seems to me that Ignatieff is taking the requisite time and effort to ensure that the right balance is struck.
Rock on, Iggy.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/for-pols-the-livin-is-never-easy/article1245339/
One can only wonder to what extent the media (Rex is simply jumping on the band wagon) is being motivated by the ‘Noldrums [=News Doldrums] of Summer’ in their demand for Ignatieff to make policy statements. Certainly Ignatieff has demonstrated that he feels it is vital to take real steps and real action to stimulate the economy. But, making press releases and statements simply so the news media can “sell papers and air time” is not necessarily in the best interests of this fair nation of ours, or the Liberal Party – both his charges.
Studied consideration of all the important factors to come up with a solution that is for the good of all and not one small sector is the name of the game, especially for Liberals:
“to build a nation where everyone can attain their potential and join together to help those that need help and protect those that need protection; through: informed, open and transparent discussion leading to a truly democratic solution for the good of all (Lloyd MacIlquham)” .
“Striking the right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus is an essential test of leadership” (John Acton). This takes time and reflection.
It seems to me that Ignatieff is taking the requisite time and effort to ensure that the right balance is struck.
Rock on, Iggy.
- Gerald Caplan - how SH of you
postedc to: Globe and mail, "Unsolicited advice for Michael Ignatieff", 8 Aug.'09, Garald Caplan
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/unsolicited-advice-for-ignatieff/article1245062/
Sounds like Iggy slam’n, Garald. You, obviously, have nothing real to say about Iggy so you refer to ‘rumour’ and mud slinging – how SH of you.
This article must be your contribution to the NDP buildup to the next election. One is left wondering what your source is, other than a fertile imagination and perhaps a bit of desperation for lack of anything concrete to use in your attack.
“No wonder so many Canadians get on their knees and thank heavens for the NDP, and look forward with such anticipation to the party's convention next week.” If this were really the case then why are the NDP considering changing their brand in an attempt to hoodwink voters into thinking that the NDP is not the same old NPD but somehow the US Democratic Party and that Jack Layton is not the same old Jack Layton but somehow Barack Obama. Certainly the NDP would need a miracle to achieve that objective.
The important thing is getting rid of Harper and his gang of Con’s. If that requires Iggy to promise a few star candidates cabinet positions to get them to run, then so be it. I have great difficulty in seeing any Liberal objecting to that and it would be very surprising if any Liberal were to put their own personal ambitions ahead of this purpose. Also, I would have thought that the NDP would want Harper out as well.
However, your article indicates that Layton and the NDP are, as before, only interested in power grubbing and gaining more seats and not the welfare of this great nation or the people of Canada. Getting rid of Harper and the Con’s will take hard work and a concerted effort by all Liberals. The NDP are either with the Liberals on this one or against them. Attacking Iggy can only help Harper and the Con’s.
“Striking the right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus is an essential test of leadership” (John Acton) – Rock on, Iggy.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/unsolicited-advice-for-ignatieff/article1245062/
Sounds like Iggy slam’n, Garald. You, obviously, have nothing real to say about Iggy so you refer to ‘rumour’ and mud slinging – how SH of you.
This article must be your contribution to the NDP buildup to the next election. One is left wondering what your source is, other than a fertile imagination and perhaps a bit of desperation for lack of anything concrete to use in your attack.
“No wonder so many Canadians get on their knees and thank heavens for the NDP, and look forward with such anticipation to the party's convention next week.” If this were really the case then why are the NDP considering changing their brand in an attempt to hoodwink voters into thinking that the NDP is not the same old NPD but somehow the US Democratic Party and that Jack Layton is not the same old Jack Layton but somehow Barack Obama. Certainly the NDP would need a miracle to achieve that objective.
The important thing is getting rid of Harper and his gang of Con’s. If that requires Iggy to promise a few star candidates cabinet positions to get them to run, then so be it. I have great difficulty in seeing any Liberal objecting to that and it would be very surprising if any Liberal were to put their own personal ambitions ahead of this purpose. Also, I would have thought that the NDP would want Harper out as well.
However, your article indicates that Layton and the NDP are, as before, only interested in power grubbing and gaining more seats and not the welfare of this great nation or the people of Canada. Getting rid of Harper and the Con’s will take hard work and a concerted effort by all Liberals. The NDP are either with the Liberals on this one or against them. Attacking Iggy can only help Harper and the Con’s.
“Striking the right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus is an essential test of leadership” (John Acton) – Rock on, Iggy.
04 August, 2009
- Harper and the Con’s political methods are an insult to the inteligence and integrity of all Canadians
excerpt submitted to: Toronto Star, "Tories paint Michael Ignatieff as purely political animal", James Travers, 4 Aug.'09
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/675712
Harper and the Con’s political methods are an insult to the inteligence and integrity of all Canadians and it is time for Harper and his methods to ‘hit the road’.
Harper and the Cons have developed and employ a propaganda machine the likes of which have not been seen in recent democratic countries. These character attacks nnot only deliberately misrepresent things but are designed to distract people from the real issues, issues that are vitally important to Canada, our way of life and our future. Harper’s only concern is acquiring and maintaining power for power’s sake and their right wing extremist purposes.
Harper and the Con’s disregard and distain for our Parliamentary institutions and System of government is a deliberate attempt to paralyze our system of government so that Harper may rule with impunity and distract people from their extreme right wing ideology.
Even Tom Flanigan refers to the political methods of the Romans, one of the most corrupt and degenerate ‘democracies’ ever, as historical justification for Harper and the Con’s extreme, negative ads.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/675712
Harper and the Con’s political methods are an insult to the inteligence and integrity of all Canadians and it is time for Harper and his methods to ‘hit the road’.
Harper and the Cons have developed and employ a propaganda machine the likes of which have not been seen in recent democratic countries. These character attacks nnot only deliberately misrepresent things but are designed to distract people from the real issues, issues that are vitally important to Canada, our way of life and our future. Harper’s only concern is acquiring and maintaining power for power’s sake and their right wing extremist purposes.
Harper and the Con’s disregard and distain for our Parliamentary institutions and System of government is a deliberate attempt to paralyze our system of government so that Harper may rule with impunity and distract people from their extreme right wing ideology.
Even Tom Flanigan refers to the political methods of the Romans, one of the most corrupt and degenerate ‘democracies’ ever, as historical justification for Harper and the Con’s extreme, negative ads.
03 August, 2009
- One of the biggest advantages, and safeguards, of EI is precisely that the rules can be made temporary and adjustable in accordance with the economy
Submitted to: Toronto Star, “Improving EI much better stimulus than infrastructureImproving EI much better stimulus than infrastructure",
Ken Georgetti, 3 Aug.’09
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/674961
It is incomprehensible to require that the EI rules must be the same when Canada’s economy is doing well and when it is doing poorly. Criticizing the Liberal government because in the mid 90’s it changed the rules to fit the then current economic circumstances smacks of crass political opportunism.
The government of the day ought to be continually vigilant with all policies to determine how they might be adjusted to better serve Canada and Canadians under the existing circumstances. This is something ideologues, especial right wing extremist like Harper and the Cons, simply can not handle – they are fixed in their ideology and their policies are designed to conform not to current realities, but to conform to their ideology. That’s why you get guys like Harper denying the recession and dragging their feet with releasing funds for the stimulus packages.
Current economically based societies must have a government that takes a very hands on approach to the economy. Not only because economic circumstances are always changing, but there are many very large and powerful economies, with which we are required to compete, so do. Harper’s hand’s off, sink-or-swim, laissez faire, no government ‘interference’ (as they call it) is exactly wrong and with likely catastrophic consequences in the long run.
Employment insurance does feed money into the economy by placing it in the hands of people who are going to spend it. It is also has the additional social benefit of help people who need help – a vital aspect of a modern democracy, something the Harper government simply doesn’t seem to understand or agree with.
It does all this in a direct fashion, quickly and with very little overhead. Further, once in place it is difficult for the current government to drag their feet. These are all problems with infrastructure spending.
Certainly there must be safeguards. But one of the biggest safeguards in the EI system is precisely that the rules are temporary and adjustable in accordance with the economic times.
The president of the Bank of Canada suggested last week that Canada is moving out of the recession. However, the general consensus seems to be that unemployment will continue at these high levels and increase for quite a while. Ontario will be especially affected and, in all likelihood never recover, or at least not for decades.
Ken Georgetti, 3 Aug.’09
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/674961
It is incomprehensible to require that the EI rules must be the same when Canada’s economy is doing well and when it is doing poorly. Criticizing the Liberal government because in the mid 90’s it changed the rules to fit the then current economic circumstances smacks of crass political opportunism.
The government of the day ought to be continually vigilant with all policies to determine how they might be adjusted to better serve Canada and Canadians under the existing circumstances. This is something ideologues, especial right wing extremist like Harper and the Cons, simply can not handle – they are fixed in their ideology and their policies are designed to conform not to current realities, but to conform to their ideology. That’s why you get guys like Harper denying the recession and dragging their feet with releasing funds for the stimulus packages.
Current economically based societies must have a government that takes a very hands on approach to the economy. Not only because economic circumstances are always changing, but there are many very large and powerful economies, with which we are required to compete, so do. Harper’s hand’s off, sink-or-swim, laissez faire, no government ‘interference’ (as they call it) is exactly wrong and with likely catastrophic consequences in the long run.
Employment insurance does feed money into the economy by placing it in the hands of people who are going to spend it. It is also has the additional social benefit of help people who need help – a vital aspect of a modern democracy, something the Harper government simply doesn’t seem to understand or agree with.
It does all this in a direct fashion, quickly and with very little overhead. Further, once in place it is difficult for the current government to drag their feet. These are all problems with infrastructure spending.
Certainly there must be safeguards. But one of the biggest safeguards in the EI system is precisely that the rules are temporary and adjustable in accordance with the economic times.
The president of the Bank of Canada suggested last week that Canada is moving out of the recession. However, the general consensus seems to be that unemployment will continue at these high levels and increase for quite a while. Ontario will be especially affected and, in all likelihood never recover, or at least not for decades.
- Carol, you should read the Toronto Star, you might learn something.
Submitted to Toronto Star, “Michael Ignatieff paying a price for his silence“, Carol Goar, 3 Aug.’09
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/674959
Thomas Axworthy provided the explanation (through no fault of his own, mind you) as to what Micheal Ignatieff is doing in his opinion in yesterday’s Star (“19th century advice for today's Liberals19th century advice for today's Liberals’)
Axworthy quoted of John Edward Dalberg Acton, whom he referred to as “one of the greatest liberals of the Victorian age”:
“Striking the right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus is an essential test of leadership”
Well, Carol, Ignatieff is taking the requisite time and effort to ensure that the “right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus” is struck – Rock on Iggie.
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/674959
Thomas Axworthy provided the explanation (through no fault of his own, mind you) as to what Micheal Ignatieff is doing in his opinion in yesterday’s Star (“19th century advice for today's Liberals19th century advice for today's Liberals’)
Axworthy quoted of John Edward Dalberg Acton, whom he referred to as “one of the greatest liberals of the Victorian age”:
“Striking the right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus is an essential test of leadership”
Well, Carol, Ignatieff is taking the requisite time and effort to ensure that the “right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus” is struck – Rock on Iggie.
02 August, 2009
- It seems to me that Ignatieff is taking the requisite time and effort to ensure that the “right balance” is struck – Rock on Iggie.
Tom,
It is very difficult to take political outlooks from the 19th century and require that they be applied in the 21st context.
Certainly we owe a great debt of gratitude to Acton for his observation: "power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely," and it is something that we ought to keep in the forefront in our current political context.
“Striking the right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus is an essential test of leadership” is a serious consideration. However, by using the phrase ‘right balance’ Acton, himself, ties the ‘balancing’ exercise into its context. We cannot take Acton’s context and use it to come to the right conclusions about that exactly that balance should be today.
Also, it is suggested that Dion erred precisely in not striking the right balance by not properly taking into account the current context in his political outlook. As an activist, or the leader of an NGO, Dion’s approach may have been the right approach. But, as the leader of a major party in a modern, free, democratic, diverse, tolerant and economy based first world country, and a Liberal party at that, he failed to even to engage in ‘striking the right balance’ and he certainly did not balance ideals with consensus, or expectations for that matter. The Liberal Party of Canada is not a NGO and does not have an agenda to promote to the exclusion of all other factors.
Studied consideration of all the important factors to come up with a solution that is for the good of all and not one small sector is the name of the game, especially for Liberals:
“to build a nation where everyone can attain their potential and join together to help those that need help and protect those that need protection; through: informed, open and transparent discussion leading to a truly democratic solution for the good of all (Lloyd MacIlquham)” .
It seems to me that Ignatieff is taking the requisite time and effort ot ensure that the “right balance” is struck – Rock on Iggie.
It is very difficult to take political outlooks from the 19th century and require that they be applied in the 21st context.
Certainly we owe a great debt of gratitude to Acton for his observation: "power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely," and it is something that we ought to keep in the forefront in our current political context.
“Striking the right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus is an essential test of leadership” is a serious consideration. However, by using the phrase ‘right balance’ Acton, himself, ties the ‘balancing’ exercise into its context. We cannot take Acton’s context and use it to come to the right conclusions about that exactly that balance should be today.
Also, it is suggested that Dion erred precisely in not striking the right balance by not properly taking into account the current context in his political outlook. As an activist, or the leader of an NGO, Dion’s approach may have been the right approach. But, as the leader of a major party in a modern, free, democratic, diverse, tolerant and economy based first world country, and a Liberal party at that, he failed to even to engage in ‘striking the right balance’ and he certainly did not balance ideals with consensus, or expectations for that matter. The Liberal Party of Canada is not a NGO and does not have an agenda to promote to the exclusion of all other factors.
Studied consideration of all the important factors to come up with a solution that is for the good of all and not one small sector is the name of the game, especially for Liberals:
“to build a nation where everyone can attain their potential and join together to help those that need help and protect those that need protection; through: informed, open and transparent discussion leading to a truly democratic solution for the good of all (Lloyd MacIlquham)” .
It seems to me that Ignatieff is taking the requisite time and effort ot ensure that the “right balance” is struck – Rock on Iggie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)