and the media (in this case owned by theTorStar Corp) leave out the direct ties to the Green Party of the 2 protesters.
Link to story at durhamregion.com with the somewhat cryptic " With files from Bruce Campion-Smith, Toronto Star" found at the bottom of the page. ( BTW Check out the picture; the arrows on their signs point the wrong way, LOL)
What the story left out:
Protester #1: Is Virginia Ervin, the "CEO Durham Federal Green Party Association and former GPC candidate for Durham.
Protester #2: Is Gail Bates, Green Party Candidate for Oshawa.
I guess they didn't think it relevant to reveal political ties when doing a political story. Maybe it is something in the water but there seems to be a lot of that going around lately.
Showing posts with label GreenParty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GreenParty. Show all posts
Friday, February 25, 2011
Sunday, July 04, 2010
Elizabeth May: " I 'm never running anywhere but Central Nova."
The Iceman has a post up today on Elizabeth May claiming to be a British Columbian and he takes her to task on her fleeting loyalties to residency.
I don't have too much to add other than this:
and this: Elizabeth May's own words.
"Nova Scotia has been my home since 1973. No matter how long I work in Ottawa, I am home in Nova Scotia nearly a quarter of every year, (some years more) working, not vacationing, from there. My dad is 82 (and does not travel) and I would not get to see much of him at all if my riding were anywhere but Nova Scotia. I am very close to my brother and sister-in-law too and they do not travel at all. I would never see them either. And my daughter would not see her grandfather and family and home while I was being a good MP somewhere else. I have to run prepared to be the best MP my riding has ever had. That means being there every possible moment. So where would family end up?? Squished into a once a year visit? I was not prepared to give up my family in Nova Scotia for politics (so, maybe “selfish” is true.)"
It seems that Lizzy sometimes has a hard time with the truth. More here and here.
No wonder she is trying to disregard the Green Party Constitution and avoid a leadership vote.
I don't have too much to add other than this:
and this: Elizabeth May's own words.
"Nova Scotia has been my home since 1973. No matter how long I work in Ottawa, I am home in Nova Scotia nearly a quarter of every year, (some years more) working, not vacationing, from there. My dad is 82 (and does not travel) and I would not get to see much of him at all if my riding were anywhere but Nova Scotia. I am very close to my brother and sister-in-law too and they do not travel at all. I would never see them either. And my daughter would not see her grandfather and family and home while I was being a good MP somewhere else. I have to run prepared to be the best MP my riding has ever had. That means being there every possible moment. So where would family end up?? Squished into a once a year visit? I was not prepared to give up my family in Nova Scotia for politics (so, maybe “selfish” is true.)"
It seems that Lizzy sometimes has a hard time with the truth. More here and here.
No wonder she is trying to disregard the Green Party Constitution and avoid a leadership vote.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Elizabeth May's Campaign Manager Quits, and other green troubles
A must read blog entry on the current troubles within the Green Party of Canada under Elizabeth May's leadership.
Excerpts:
'John Fryer just quit as Elizabeth May`s campaign manager in SGI. I won`t bother going into the endless list of people who have been briefly associated on a professional basis with Elizabeth May and the current leadership of the Party who have quit, been fired, or just shunted aside.....'
'So there we were, and here we are. A National Party with full slate of directors, leader, deputy-leader, and communications staffers on the payroll, but NO FIELD ORGANISERS!'
'So to summarise, the current leadership has been exposed as hopelessly incompetent with our finances and Party management. They ramped up hiring and spending, then were forced to 180 and fire everybody. The response to the unfolding woes has been to re-focus the Party from encouraging and supporting local organising at the grassroots level, to making electing Elizabeth May the sole priority of the Party. '
And you thought Ignatieff had problems.
Excerpts:
'John Fryer just quit as Elizabeth May`s campaign manager in SGI. I won`t bother going into the endless list of people who have been briefly associated on a professional basis with Elizabeth May and the current leadership of the Party who have quit, been fired, or just shunted aside.....'
'So there we were, and here we are. A National Party with full slate of directors, leader, deputy-leader, and communications staffers on the payroll, but NO FIELD ORGANISERS!'
'So to summarise, the current leadership has been exposed as hopelessly incompetent with our finances and Party management. They ramped up hiring and spending, then were forced to 180 and fire everybody. The response to the unfolding woes has been to re-focus the Party from encouraging and supporting local organising at the grassroots level, to making electing Elizabeth May the sole priority of the Party. '
And you thought Ignatieff had problems.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Rock Solid. Elizabeth May gets it wrong again.
Elizabeth May: "The data is rock-solid and it tells us that there's now 30 per cent more CO2 than at any time.”
Any time? There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today. The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today.
So May gets another one wrong. Time to add it to the collection of other May foibles.
Calling Canadians stupid and tries to lie her way out along with a few others.
May loses it at the Munk debates and gets her Mic shut off, while her mouth keeps on going. Oh and there is the AIDS comment as well. It all starts about the 2:20 mark.
Enjoy.
Any time? There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today. The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today.
So May gets another one wrong. Time to add it to the collection of other May foibles.
Calling Canadians stupid and tries to lie her way out along with a few others.
May loses it at the Munk debates and gets her Mic shut off, while her mouth keeps on going. Oh and there is the AIDS comment as well. It all starts about the 2:20 mark.
Enjoy.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Prorogation Day in Canada.
If you were to consider the amount of ink used by the media on tomorrows "Prorogation day in Canada" one might actually believe that it will turn out to be more popular than "Hockey Night in Canada. That of course is wrong, but give credit to the MSM in this country for trying to promote something for them to cover during the traditional slow period in Ottawa that comes with the winter break.
I don't even want to hazard a guess as to what type of numbers we will see tomorrow but regardless of how many do show up, I think it is a pretty safe bet they can be broken down into the following groups:
The largest contingent of the 'protesters' will be your hard core Harper haters made up of mostly lefties who despise the PM and would complain that he is taking away jobs from doctors if he discovered the cure for cancer. This group is always a guarantee to show up at anything anti-conservative.
The next largest group would be the partisans aligned with specific political parties.
Many Greens can be expected to show up and in some cases they have even gone so far as to take part in the organization of this so called "NON PARTISAN" event.
The NDP will be out in force, which is to be expected, but at least Jack Layton has a plan; as unconstitutional as it may be. (Note to Iggy: Your coalition buddy is setting you up with his motion.) This group may be large as unions have money to organize and bus in the "grassroots".
The Liberals: Yes it is expected that many Liberals will be out for partisan gain trying to pull the wool over the eyes of Canadians by looking like they are against prorogation even though LPC policy says otherwise and their leader, Micheal Ignatieff, has stated he is in favour of keeping it.
Ignatieff it turns out was very much in favour of the PM proroguing the first time he did it back in 2008. For the MSM who just read that and have their doubts, please feel free to stick a microphone Ignatieff's way and ask him yourself. It would be hard for him to say that he was not in favour of it in 2008 when he has described the coalition as something so divisive that it would have caused a "permanent division" to Canadian society. You want something to cover MSM; just ask Iggy that question and watch him squirm.
All of the above combined will make up the bulk of the numbers that we see tomorrow; my guess is that they will make up about 90% of those in attendance, but one must also remember that most of these people would never vote conservative in the first place.
Of the remaining numbers, the one group that we should be concerned about is the small number that will attend, who are not there with a particular partisan axe to grind, that are honestly upset over the PM proroguing. This group can be divided into 2 sub groups with the first being the ones that are just sick of seeing politicians not working for any reason, and the other being the ones who have been convinced by the media that this prorogation is not a routine event and that it is an affront to democracy. There is no convincing the first bunch, they think all politicians are lazy, but I do believe that if the others learn the facts about prorogation being a much used, legal, and indeed a constitutional power I think the damage will be minimal. Do they really want to open up the constitution to take away this power? I doubt it very much that many do.
As for the small amount of those in attendance tomorrow who did not make it into the above groupings; their numbers will be made up mostly of media people and a handful of guys there just because they want to score with some dipper chick that was already planing to attend. The first group is potentially dangerous, while the second may very well turn out to be Conservative voters sometime in the future.
There you have it. Some honest analysis of the numbers that I doubt you will see anywhere in the MSM. Not because they are unable to do so, but rather because it is dangerous for the media to analyze the news that they themselves have shaped and intensely promoted for weeks now. The old adage applies: Don't become the story.
Oh and I have to add a quick thought on the detainee red herring we keep hearing about. In the end, the already 3 years old detainee story is going to turn out the same way the other so called "game changers" such as Chuck Cadman, in and out financing, H1N1, wafergate, and a host of others have turned out to be. Nothing more than Liberal games and smear.
For fun: A couple of bonus questions to ask the anti-prorogation types.
Asking any Liberal why they are there if their party and Iggy supports prorogation is an obvious one but if you want some real fun try asking the following.
Last year during the coalition crisis did you claim legitimacy for the coalition because of the constitution? If so, why are you now against that same constitution and the legitimacy of prorogation? Is there anything else you want to change in our constitution while we are opening it up?
And lastly please have a safe Prorogation Day in Canada and enjoy the wall to wall MSM coverage.
From The Ottawa Citizen and Susan Riley of all people :
I don't even want to hazard a guess as to what type of numbers we will see tomorrow but regardless of how many do show up, I think it is a pretty safe bet they can be broken down into the following groups:
The largest contingent of the 'protesters' will be your hard core Harper haters made up of mostly lefties who despise the PM and would complain that he is taking away jobs from doctors if he discovered the cure for cancer. This group is always a guarantee to show up at anything anti-conservative.
The next largest group would be the partisans aligned with specific political parties.
Many Greens can be expected to show up and in some cases they have even gone so far as to take part in the organization of this so called "NON PARTISAN" event.
The NDP will be out in force, which is to be expected, but at least Jack Layton has a plan; as unconstitutional as it may be. (Note to Iggy: Your coalition buddy is setting you up with his motion.) This group may be large as unions have money to organize and bus in the "grassroots".
The Liberals: Yes it is expected that many Liberals will be out for partisan gain trying to pull the wool over the eyes of Canadians by looking like they are against prorogation even though LPC policy says otherwise and their leader, Micheal Ignatieff, has stated he is in favour of keeping it.
Ignatieff it turns out was very much in favour of the PM proroguing the first time he did it back in 2008. For the MSM who just read that and have their doubts, please feel free to stick a microphone Ignatieff's way and ask him yourself. It would be hard for him to say that he was not in favour of it in 2008 when he has described the coalition as something so divisive that it would have caused a "permanent division" to Canadian society. You want something to cover MSM; just ask Iggy that question and watch him squirm.
All of the above combined will make up the bulk of the numbers that we see tomorrow; my guess is that they will make up about 90% of those in attendance, but one must also remember that most of these people would never vote conservative in the first place.
Of the remaining numbers, the one group that we should be concerned about is the small number that will attend, who are not there with a particular partisan axe to grind, that are honestly upset over the PM proroguing. This group can be divided into 2 sub groups with the first being the ones that are just sick of seeing politicians not working for any reason, and the other being the ones who have been convinced by the media that this prorogation is not a routine event and that it is an affront to democracy. There is no convincing the first bunch, they think all politicians are lazy, but I do believe that if the others learn the facts about prorogation being a much used, legal, and indeed a constitutional power I think the damage will be minimal. Do they really want to open up the constitution to take away this power? I doubt it very much that many do.
As for the small amount of those in attendance tomorrow who did not make it into the above groupings; their numbers will be made up mostly of media people and a handful of guys there just because they want to score with some dipper chick that was already planing to attend. The first group is potentially dangerous, while the second may very well turn out to be Conservative voters sometime in the future.
There you have it. Some honest analysis of the numbers that I doubt you will see anywhere in the MSM. Not because they are unable to do so, but rather because it is dangerous for the media to analyze the news that they themselves have shaped and intensely promoted for weeks now. The old adage applies: Don't become the story.
Oh and I have to add a quick thought on the detainee red herring we keep hearing about. In the end, the already 3 years old detainee story is going to turn out the same way the other so called "game changers" such as Chuck Cadman, in and out financing, H1N1, wafergate, and a host of others have turned out to be. Nothing more than Liberal games and smear.
For fun: A couple of bonus questions to ask the anti-prorogation types.
Asking any Liberal why they are there if their party and Iggy supports prorogation is an obvious one but if you want some real fun try asking the following.
Last year during the coalition crisis did you claim legitimacy for the coalition because of the constitution? If so, why are you now against that same constitution and the legitimacy of prorogation? Is there anything else you want to change in our constitution while we are opening it up?
And lastly please have a safe Prorogation Day in Canada and enjoy the wall to wall MSM coverage.
From The Ottawa Citizen and Susan Riley of all people :
He (Ignatieff) encouraged anti-prorogation organizers in a Facebook posting this week, and confirmed he will be attending Saturday's protest in Ottawa, but refuses to back Jack Layton's call for legislation limiting future use of prorogation. When asked to define his political values, he paused then replied: "I'm passionate about freedom." So was George W. Bush.
On the pressing issue of looming deficits, he told reporters it isn't his problem, it's Harper's problem -- and he, Ignatieff, isn't about to help his rival out of the swamp. (Never mind what happens to the rest of us, I guess.)
He continues to answer questions with questions, urge patience and promise a bold new vision any time now. He sounds like Karlheinz Schreiber: wait until next week, then the true story will emerge.
Iggy being compared to KHS. Classic!
ht BLY .
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Credibility.
Totally shot!
You need more. Listen as Elizabeth May rewrites history @ approx 38:00. Note to Elizabeth, Germany declared war on the USA first on Dec 11, 1941 and not the other way around. It is kind of hard to ignore a declaration of war against you no matter how much the public resistance. Considering just how much she is versed on this time period I wonder how she got this wrong.
Still more. Watch as she tries to lie her way out of her own words.
Elizabeth May's credibility = zero.
ht Petalusa and Unambiguously Ambidextrous.
You need more. Listen as Elizabeth May rewrites history @ approx 38:00. Note to Elizabeth, Germany declared war on the USA first on Dec 11, 1941 and not the other way around. It is kind of hard to ignore a declaration of war against you no matter how much the public resistance. Considering just how much she is versed on this time period I wonder how she got this wrong.
Still more. Watch as she tries to lie her way out of her own words.
Elizabeth May's credibility = zero.
ht Petalusa and Unambiguously Ambidextrous.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Shut Up Elizabeth May!
Seriously Elizabeth, just shut the hell up, and tell David Miller to do the same.
A blast from the past: Watch as Elizabeth May calls Canadians stupid and then lies about it multiple times!
Another shorter Youtube video on the same quote.
Related from a few days ago: May having more difficulties with the facts.
A blast from the past: Watch as Elizabeth May calls Canadians stupid and then lies about it multiple times!
Another shorter Youtube video on the same quote.
Related from a few days ago: May having more difficulties with the facts.
Friday, November 07, 2008
Ex Green Party Candidate sues GP for some green
The former Green Party of Canada candidate in Newton-North Delta, John Shavluk, is suing the party and its leader, Elizabeth May, for libel, claiming he was wrongly accused of anti-Semitism.
Read the entire story here.
Update:There is more green than meets the eye at The Province as for some reason they have included the following at the end of the above linked story on John Shavluk. (screenshot)
"Aldergrove.'fortified' barn burns to ground
Read the entire story here.
Update:There is more green than meets the eye at The Province as for some reason they have included the following at the end of the above linked story on John Shavluk. (screenshot)
"Aldergrove.'fortified' barn burns to ground
A barn in Aldergrove that firefighters say was used as a marijuana grow-operation burned to the ground in an early-morning blaze yesterday.
The fire started in the electrical system of the two-storey barn that was divided into several rooms, said Langley's assistant fire chief Bruce Ferguson.
"The building was heavily fortified. Its windows were boarded up with plywood," he said. "We confirmed it was a grow-op."
It took fire trucks from three fire halls five hours to control the blaze in the 400-block 256 Street, he said.
No one was injured.
The owner of the house on the property told firefighters she rented out the barn and had no knowledge of the grow-op, said Ferguson."
Just what is The Province insinuating here?
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
The Green Party owes Jennifer Wright some money
Earlier tonight at an all candidates radio/cable tv debate local Green Party candidate for Edmonton Millwoods Beaumont, David Allan Hrushka, tonight called the GP policy on the environment said
Since Jennifer Wright is the rightful owner of the Green Shift name, and the Liberal Party of Canada has, only through threats of legal action, come to a financial agreement to license this name, shouldn't the Green Party have to pay up for using it as well?
I feel an invoice coming your way soon Liz.
Oh and where in the Green Party platform can I find out more about those "municipal registered retirement savings plans" that your candidate mentioned tonight?
Since Jennifer Wright is the rightful owner of the Green Shift name, and the Liberal Party of Canada has, only through threats of legal action, come to a financial agreement to license this name, shouldn't the Green Party have to pay up for using it as well?
I feel an invoice coming your way soon Liz.
Oh and where in the Green Party platform can I find out more about those "municipal registered retirement savings plans" that your candidate mentioned tonight?
Awesome job Greens, awesome.
Monday, September 15, 2008
The Green Party and the mistake that no amount of spin can change.
Most of you are aware of the saga of NDP blogger Buckdog last week but for those that are not here is a short highlight reel that starts when blogger Stephen Taylor posts an old video clip on YouTube of Elizabeth May saying that she thinks Canadians are stupid.
Buckdog like many other bloggers also posts the video on his site.
John Bennett, Director of Communications Green Party of Canada threatens Buckdog with legal action , from both himself and although not authorised to do so, TVO, in a very poorly written and spelling mistake laden email claiming that the video was slanderous.
Stephen Taylor clarifies the video has not been doctored and so does TVO.
John Bennett does apologize, but just can't help but add a little spin to help save his leader. (Bolding mine) "In the TVO clip, Elizabeth May clearly says "they" think Canadians are stupid, referring to the opinions of some politicians. She then turns to the questioner and agrees with HIS assessment that a carbontax is essential. No spin can change that."
Elizabeth May again goes on TVO and must think Canadians really are stupid because she tries to tell Canadians that she actually said "disagree"rather than "agree". I have yet to find a single person who believes this claim.
Which leaves us with this last thought on this subject: If May did say disagree rather than agree, what should one make about what Mr. Bennett had stated in his apology email "She then turns to the questioner and agrees with HIS assessment that a carbontax is essential. No spin can change that."
Someone is making stuff up on the fly at the Green Party, and John, no spin can change that.
Update: May changes her story yet again.
Hey, Elizabeth;it's not the crime that gets you, it's the cover-up.
Buckdog like many other bloggers also posts the video on his site.
John Bennett, Director of Communications Green Party of Canada threatens Buckdog with legal action , from both himself and although not authorised to do so, TVO, in a very poorly written and spelling mistake laden email claiming that the video was slanderous.
Stephen Taylor clarifies the video has not been doctored and so does TVO.
John Bennett does apologize, but just can't help but add a little spin to help save his leader. (Bolding mine) "In the TVO clip, Elizabeth May clearly says "they" think Canadians are stupid, referring to the opinions of some politicians. She then turns to the questioner and agrees with HIS assessment that a carbontax is essential. No spin can change that."
Elizabeth May again goes on TVO and must think Canadians really are stupid because she tries to tell Canadians that she actually said "disagree"rather than "agree". I have yet to find a single person who believes this claim.
Which leaves us with this last thought on this subject: If May did say disagree rather than agree, what should one make about what Mr. Bennett had stated in his apology email "She then turns to the questioner and agrees with HIS assessment that a carbontax is essential. No spin can change that."
Someone is making stuff up on the fly at the Green Party, and John, no spin can change that.
Update: May changes her story yet again.
Hey, Elizabeth;it's not the crime that gets you, it's the cover-up.
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Bill Casey Honourary Green and other GP News
Green Party leader Elizabeth May announced that her party considers Independent Member of Parliament Bill Casey "an honourary Green". The Green Party of Canada and its Electoral District Association in Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley will not be opposing the re-election of Mr Casey.
I think Elizabeth May might be angling for the 'real' first Green MP. I wonder if she can convince her good buddy Stephane Dion to not run a Liberal in the riding.
UD: from the comments "So in conclusion, Ms. Environment suppports Casey as an honorary Green party member for supporting an Atlantic Accord which would have supported more offshore oil development. So Ms. May stands now with the Republicans in supporting more offshore oil development. A proud moment for the Green Party of Canada.'
In other GP news: John Shavluk, the Green Party candidate who threatened to sue the blog Dust my Broom for exposing an anti Semitic posting, has been told that he can not run as a candidate for the GP in the upcoming election.
"The Green Party has announced that John Shavluk will not be the candidate for the party in Newton—North Delta, following revelations that he made comments in 2006 on an online discussion forum that are anti-Semitic."
I guess now he will have all the extra time he needs to get to the bottom of what really happened on Sept 11, 2001.
I think Elizabeth May might be angling for the 'real' first Green MP. I wonder if she can convince her good buddy Stephane Dion to not run a Liberal in the riding.
UD: from the comments "So in conclusion, Ms. Environment suppports Casey as an honorary Green party member for supporting an Atlantic Accord which would have supported more offshore oil development. So Ms. May stands now with the Republicans in supporting more offshore oil development. A proud moment for the Green Party of Canada.'
In other GP news: John Shavluk, the Green Party candidate who threatened to sue the blog Dust my Broom for exposing an anti Semitic posting, has been told that he can not run as a candidate for the GP in the upcoming election.
"The Green Party has announced that John Shavluk will not be the candidate for the party in Newton—North Delta, following revelations that he made comments in 2006 on an online discussion forum that are anti-Semitic."
I guess now he will have all the extra time he needs to get to the bottom of what really happened on Sept 11, 2001.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Location, Location, Location.
IMHO, you could not get a better location than this ad found on the CTV.ca website.
and for your viewing pleasure the latest CPC ad
and for your viewing pleasure the latest CPC ad
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Maybe she should call the cops.
Green Party leader Elizabeth May, in Guelph for the local by-election, has accused the Liberals of "stealing".
Friday, May 16, 2008
Elizabeth May: Destroying the Green Party for her friend Dion
From the sounds of this, Elizabeth May looks to be well on her way to destroying the Green Party of Canada from within.
“Elizabeth May, the leader of the Green Party of Canada, says she’s ready to contemplate a strategic debate with the three opposition parties in Ottawa to work out new forms of electoral co-operation to block the re-election of Stephen Harper’s party.
“She would even be ready to imagine a strategy which is being discussed by some environmental groups, which would consist of calling in every region on people who are aware of the environmental stakes to put aside their party preference at the next election to support, in each riding, the candidate likeliest to beat the Conservative if the latter has the slightest chance of winning power.
“…She wouldn’t hesitate to make strategic alliances with the Bloc Québécois, as she admires the rigorous work of several of their MPs, even though she does not share their vision of Canada’s future.Elizabeth, I have a question for you. In how many ridings in Canada would the Green Party candidate be "the likeliest to beat the Conservative" candidate? Since Ms. May is unlikely to respond and answer my questions, lets try to put a realistic number to the above.
For the sake of argument lets use 50? You can look at the results from the last election and see how many Greens finished in the runner up spot yourself, but I think I am being REAL generous by using this figure.
So based on her comments above, now what?
By May's own proposal it appears that over 250 candidates, their EDA's, and the various workers and supporters (you know, the grass roots) would be forced to put aside their efforts and countless hours of work they have dedicated toward THEIR candidates and party to vote for someone else. And judging by her bizarre alliance with Dion, it is safe to say that she wants her party to vote Liberal.
Not having respect for your own party and it's supporters, and folding before the hand is even dealt. What a way to invigorate those Green Party supporters Liz, your leadership ability astounds.
Monday, April 14, 2008
The great seal hunt scam
Listen carefully to the words of Sea Sheppard head Paul Watson in this 1978 interview on the CBC by Barbara Frum.
Contrast those words to this recent news. I guess the lure of all that money to be made from those cute little seals was just too great to pass up for Paul Watson after all.
A big tip of the hat to Hunter at Climbing out of the Dark
Contrast those words to this recent news. I guess the lure of all that money to be made from those cute little seals was just too great to pass up for Paul Watson after all.
A big tip of the hat to Hunter at Climbing out of the Dark
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Could a merger be in the cards?
"Where are the Greens"? My new and non Liberal blogging friend Idealistic Pragmatist asks that very timely and probing question, and gives some thoughtful analysis & opinion on the Greens silence for Liberals lack of support for the recent NDP non confidence motion on the environment.
I agree with almost everything she wrote and have to wonder as well, just how far does that deal between Elizabeth May and Stephane Dion really go. They said it was limited only for their own 2 ridings, but in truth it looks to have gone much farther than that. As IP noted there seems to be NO criticism from the Green Party on anything to do with Dion and the Liberals. You would think it obvious by the way many Libloggers are going after their own leadership under Dion, that a competing political party would at the very least be raising some questions of their own. Yet there is silence from the Green Party.Is this lack of criticism part of the deal or perhaps,
Could a full fledged merger be in the works between the Liberals and Green Party?
The Greens already look to be going out of their way to play extra nice with their leaders Liberal friends, and since May has already endorsed Dion to be Prime Minister, I don't see it as out of the range of possibility that they take it a step further and try merging the 2 parties.
It is a risky proposition but given the recent setbacks of the Liberals it could be a possible strategy. If you take a look to the polls (take your pick) the differences in support between the CPC and LPC has been relatively consistent since the election. Now if the Liberals could manage to add on the Greens numbers to that of their own, they easily become top dog in the race.
While I do not see the numbers going that way if a merger did indeed happen, just the thought of it occurring might just be enough for the desperate Dion led Liberals to make the attempt.
I think we should be keeping on this one, because you just never know what will happen.
After all, the Libs have nothing else and the clock is ticking on the Liberal self destruct timer.
I agree with almost everything she wrote and have to wonder as well, just how far does that deal between Elizabeth May and Stephane Dion really go. They said it was limited only for their own 2 ridings, but in truth it looks to have gone much farther than that. As IP noted there seems to be NO criticism from the Green Party on anything to do with Dion and the Liberals. You would think it obvious by the way many Libloggers are going after their own leadership under Dion, that a competing political party would at the very least be raising some questions of their own. Yet there is silence from the Green Party.Is this lack of criticism part of the deal or perhaps,
Could a full fledged merger be in the works between the Liberals and Green Party?
The Greens already look to be going out of their way to play extra nice with their leaders Liberal friends, and since May has already endorsed Dion to be Prime Minister, I don't see it as out of the range of possibility that they take it a step further and try merging the 2 parties.
It is a risky proposition but given the recent setbacks of the Liberals it could be a possible strategy. If you take a look to the polls (take your pick) the differences in support between the CPC and LPC has been relatively consistent since the election. Now if the Liberals could manage to add on the Greens numbers to that of their own, they easily become top dog in the race.
While I do not see the numbers going that way if a merger did indeed happen, just the thought of it occurring might just be enough for the desperate Dion led Liberals to make the attempt.
I think we should be keeping on this one, because you just never know what will happen.
After all, the Libs have nothing else and the clock is ticking on the Liberal self destruct timer.
Friday, November 30, 2007
To the 307 Liberal Riding Presidents in Montreal....
Please have some sympathy for this man, Allan Armsworthy, as you party put on a brave face to cheer on your "leader" this weekend in Montreal.
After all, poor Allan has nothing to do until after the next election when the good Liberal supporters of Central Nova will again get to choose for themselves a Liberal candidate; instead of having Dion unilaterally decide that the Liberals are no longer a national party and that they should support a nazi obsessed person from another political party instead.
So please do enjoy your party, but also remember to take some time to think of Allan and all those other abandoned Liberals in Central Nova.
A bit of NON truth in advertising from the Liberal Party of Canada website linked above:
Central Nova:
"Your riding is currently not held by a Liberal Member of Parliament. Here are five ways you can help the Liberal team win back your riding today.
6. Get rid of Stephane Dion and bring democracy and leadership back to the LPC.
Now there is some truth in advertising.
Al
After all, poor Allan has nothing to do until after the next election when the good Liberal supporters of Central Nova will again get to choose for themselves a Liberal candidate; instead of having Dion unilaterally decide that the Liberals are no longer a national party and that they should support a nazi obsessed person from another political party instead.
So please do enjoy your party, but also remember to take some time to think of Allan and all those other abandoned Liberals in Central Nova.
-----------------
A bit of NON truth in advertising from the Liberal Party of Canada website linked above:
Central Nova:
"Your riding is currently not held by a Liberal Member of Parliament. Here are five ways you can help the Liberal team win back your riding today.
- Join the Liberal Party and help us make Canada a better place.
- Become a volunteer and create change in your own neighborhood.
- Make a donation to help us fund our next election campaign.
- Spread the word about the Liberal vision for Canada with your friends and neighbours.
- Stay informed — sign up for Liberal e-news and learn more about what the Liberal team is doing for you."
So exactly how are the Liberals possibly going to "win back" the riding if they have no candidate running? Maybe they should add a number 6 to the above list.
6. Get rid of Stephane Dion and bring democracy and leadership back to the LPC.
Now there is some truth in advertising.
Al
Monday, April 16, 2007
The NDP choose their Candidate for Central Nova
From the CBC Louise Lorefice of Antigonish will represent the NDP in the Nova Scotia riding of Central Nova, where the Liberals recently agreed not to run a candidate.
Now because the situation is so "urgent" and "there is no time to waste" and because Elizabeth May is so committed to non partisanship; will she announce she is stepping aside so the new NDP candidate, whose party finished second in the last election, can defeat Peter Mackay?
I didn't think so.
Al
This is interesting if it is true. It looks like the NDP constitution does not allow Jack Layton to pull a May/Dion type deal even if he wanted to.
What does the Liberal Party constitution say about the same deal? According to Warren Kinsella, Dion is breaking the rules. Hopefully links to follow.
Now because the situation is so "urgent" and "there is no time to waste" and because Elizabeth May is so committed to non partisanship; will she announce she is stepping aside so the new NDP candidate, whose party finished second in the last election, can defeat Peter Mackay?
I didn't think so.
Al
This is interesting if it is true. It looks like the NDP constitution does not allow Jack Layton to pull a May/Dion type deal even if he wanted to.
What does the Liberal Party constitution say about the same deal? According to Warren Kinsella, Dion is breaking the rules. Hopefully links to follow.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Unanswered Questions about the Dion/May pact
A few questions for Elizabeth May and Stephane Dion.
For Ms. May: As leader of the Green Party of Canada, are you committed to try to form a government and become Prime Minister? If not, why have you not told your own party and Canadians what your goals really are, and explain to Canadians why they should vote for a party with a leader who has no intention of trying to form a government.
From this Green Party Press release the answer to the above should be clear "We recognize that a government in which Stéphane Dion served as Prime Minister could work well with a Green Caucus of MPs, led by Elizabeth May, committed to action on climate."
For M. Dion: If as stated in the press conference that the there is NO time to waste and the urgency of the current situation requires immediate action; are you prepared to, at the earliest opportunity, call a non confidence vote or do everything in your power to have an election? If not, doesn't this "urgency" just look like more political games to the Canadian Public?
For Ms. May: You have stated that this deal was "open and transparent" and that there were no backroom deals. Why have you been hiding the fact that you have been trying to work a deal with the NDP along similar lines?
For M. Dion: What happened to the commitments made at the Liberal Convention to a 308 seat strategy? and Is what you have done even legal within the Liberal Party constitution?
For Ms. May: You have stated over and over that this is deal is an example of cooperation and is for non partisan reasons. How than can you reconcile that with the following, from an article from the Toronto Star? "
For Ms. May: As leader of the Green Party of Canada, are you committed to try to form a government and become Prime Minister? If not, why have you not told your own party and Canadians what your goals really are, and explain to Canadians why they should vote for a party with a leader who has no intention of trying to form a government.
From this Green Party Press release the answer to the above should be clear "We recognize that a government in which Stéphane Dion served as Prime Minister could work well with a Green Caucus of MPs, led by Elizabeth May, committed to action on climate."
For M. Dion: If as stated in the press conference that the there is NO time to waste and the urgency of the current situation requires immediate action; are you prepared to, at the earliest opportunity, call a non confidence vote or do everything in your power to have an election? If not, doesn't this "urgency" just look like more political games to the Canadian Public?
For Ms. May: You have stated that this deal was "open and transparent" and that there were no backroom deals. Why have you been hiding the fact that you have been trying to work a deal with the NDP along similar lines?
For M. Dion: What happened to the commitments made at the Liberal Convention to a 308 seat strategy? and Is what you have done even legal within the Liberal Party constitution?
For Ms. May: You have stated over and over that this is deal is an example of cooperation and is for non partisan reasons. How than can you reconcile that with the following, from an article from the Toronto Star? "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
