I am surprised that the Liberals continue to go on about the Afghan detainee story when they know that the longer this remains an issue, the more that comes out about their major role in the entire mess. I noted last week that the Liberals have a very short memory regarding the facts of the matter and the longer this goes on the worse off the Liberals look for playing politics for politics sake. Dumb politics; unless you really do think the average Canadian voter is too stupid to figure out the truth. Think Mark Holland and the boxes all over again, as what first looks like good news for the Liberals turns out to be an poor political mistake in the end.
--------------------
Speaking about dumb politics:
Why are the opposition parties wasting the governments and everyone else's time on Shane Doan? This is the type of crap that puts the average Canadian off politics, and yet some of theses clowns in Ottawa couldn't care less what the average Canadian thinks and will pursue this only for their own political gain. Pathetic.
Isn't Denis Coderre involved in not 1, but 2 different matters of litigation with Shane Doan in regards to this very subject? I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on television, but should someone already involved in a matter before the courts, be speaking out publicly on the matter or be using his position in parliament to do ANYTHING at all that could effect these court cases? The optics on this look bad to Denis, but it is par for the course of late with how the Libs are doing things.
----------------
* "What a stupid B&%$^#!"
Dions new pal Elizabeth May put her foot in her mouth a few days ago when, among other things, she compared the governments climate change stance to the appeasement of the Nazis. Even Dion, who ignored the subject in the House, eventually had to come out against the over the top remarks by May; "We should not use it -- for the very reason that in the spectrum of power, the Nazi regime is beyond any comparison, so I'm uncomfortable with the reference to Chamberlain about anything else than what happened in the Second World War.", but that didn't seem to have any effect on May as she made matters even worse when she tried to defend herself. She is fitting right in with the Liberals in the bad optics department.
* To borrow the lame excuse Elizabeth May tried to use: I am only quoting someone else, so I claim to neither agree nor disagree with the quote and assume no responsibility for it.
I think about as many people will believe me as did believe Lizzy with that one.
Al
Dions new pal Elizabeth May put her foot in her mouth a few days ago when, among other things, she compared the governments climate change stance to the appeasement of the Nazis. Even Dion, who ignored the subject in the House, eventually had to come out against the over the top remarks by May; "We should not use it -- for the very reason that in the spectrum of power, the Nazi regime is beyond any comparison, so I'm uncomfortable with the reference to Chamberlain about anything else than what happened in the Second World War.", but that didn't seem to have any effect on May as she made matters even worse when she tried to defend herself. She is fitting right in with the Liberals in the bad optics department.
* To borrow the lame excuse Elizabeth May tried to use: I am only quoting someone else, so I claim to neither agree nor disagree with the quote and assume no responsibility for it.
I think about as many people will believe me as did believe Lizzy with that one.
Al
7 comments:
Maybe she should have said MacKenzie King
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0008717
But MacKenzie King was a Liberal, so that may have upset some of her friends.
She was on Duffy today again saying that because it was a quote she was not responsible; with friends like these...
I also notice that her Liberal friends do not talk much about the religious aspects of her little 'sermon'. They get all bent out of shape if the PM says 'God bless Canada' in a speech, but Ignore May when she asks Jesus for help with her environment plan.
Al
Actually, Al, there has been a fair amount of discussion among Greens and others about the religious aspect. Lizzie gave a reasonably succinct interview to CanadianChristianity.com. If anyone wonders where she stands on the issue, she's provided answers.
BTW, the continual rehashing of shocked responses to May's analogy arer pretty lame when Maclean's has clearly quoted members from all thre big parties (including Peter MacKay and Jack Layton) having used the same Chamberlain analogy on the floor of the House.
Double standards, anyone?
JB
Hi JB. So your defense of EM on this is that because OTHERS have used the same line, it makes it OK?
Talk about lame.
To quote mothers everywhere "If Johnny jumped off a bridge would you?" Face it JB, it was not a bright move on her part, and all the negative press coverage she has received because of it just confirms it was a bad move.
On the religion thing; I have no issue at all with EM's beliefs, but the free ride she is getting from her new Liberal friends, who generally are not fond of this type of thing, is a bit revealing.
Al
I wasn't saying that it's okay just because others have done it. I was saying that it's hypocritical to criticize May as if she's the only one who's done this. References to Chamberlain have been made by others and went uncriticized. When May used the analogy, she was pounced upon - even by some who have used it themselves.
I see that as a double standard.
I didn't realize that the Liberals were anti-religion. I'm not a Liberal so I may not be aware of how they are generally not fond of religion. Is there something in their policies that is anti-religion? I'd be quite interested in seeing that.
Most party leaders give some credence to religion through their actions. Religious leaders like the Pope and the Dahli Lama are feted by PM's and MP's. Religious holidays are acknowledged and party leaders often issue statements commemorating Chanukah, Easter, Ramadan and other religious observances.
Court proceedings include the swearing of oaths on a Bible or other religious tome. As I mentioned on my blog, Canadian citizenship ceremonies are sometimes conducted in churches and include prayers - even when the Liberals were in power.
Perhaps you're correct and it was not a bright move to talk honestly about one's religious convictions in the context of delivering a guest sermon in a church. Perhaps talking honestly about anything is not a bright move for a politician.
JB
Criticize them all JB, thay all deserve it for using such a stupid comparison.
Did you click the link (sermon) in my comment? That is just the tip of the iceberg. Google Harper and "God bless Canada" for more.
Al
Post a Comment