Toronto Centre Federal By-election (cancelled)

Haha. Toronjohn, you really aren't going to be able to teach me too much about Trudeau.

By the end of the Second World War ("After Auschwitz," as you mentioned), Trudeau had renounced his conservative childhood beliefs and was at school in the United States. In letters home near the end of the war, he expressed great regret at not having realized the calamity of the war. Later in life, he was always considered a great friend of the Jewish people and in fact represented Canada's most Jewish riding. Read past page 10 of the book, or other more detailed books, and you might be better able to pass judgement on someone. Just to set the record straight for anyone who might get taken in by this troll's smear attempt.

Anyway, Trudeau was vaguely aligned with the NDP before he decided to run for Parliament as a Liberal.

toronjohn said:

So then all the gay bashing that went on " has to be understood in the context of the period ". It must somehow be accepted.. and understood... because some greasers suffered from " overearnest teen/twentysomething homophobic misunderstanding "

HATE is HATE... 1905...1995 ...2008.


toronjohn

P.S. "He Used To Be" "He Use To Be"... <<< see grammar book suggestion >>>

Click to expand...

[1] As I suggested, in that case, you might as well call Tommy Douglas a hatemonger, because he had a "problem" with homosexuality.

[2] Re the P.S., I was wondering what you were referring to--did I make a typo?--then I noticed what I wrote--

"You might as well say that Rae has no business running in the Gay Village because he used to be NDP Premier and Tommy Douglas was a homophobe..."

So, are you suggesting "used to be" is incorrect and "use to be" is correct?!?

Look, Toronjohn; we know, hate is hate is hate, whether a century ago or now. Like, duh. The trouble is, your argument against hate is clumsy, amateurish, and (as per the above example) grammatically incompetent. As a messenger, you're laughably inept. And if you feel you're being personally discriminated against, such ineptitude's more likely to blame than anything related to race or culture or orientation...

Anyone who confuses the policies of Socreds (Social Credit) with those of the CCF/NDP certainly isn't very informed about Canadian political history.

The Social Credit party wasn't very socialist at all, in fact the opposite. The legacies of the Socreds today are the Liberals in BC (not at all close the Federal Liberals unlike most other provinces with the possible exception of Quebec), the Conservative Party of Alberta, and the Western/Reform wing that's dominating the Conservatives in Ottawa.

I suggest you quit trying to push your agenda here. You're not going to win a debate with people like unimaginative. You just can't.

SeanTrans said:

The Social Credit party wasn't very socialist at all, in fact the opposite. The legacies of the Socreds today are the Liberals in BC (not at all close the Federal Liberals unlike most other provinces with the possible exception of Quebec), the Conservative Party of Alberta, and the Western/Reform wing that's dominating the Conservatives in Ottawa.

Click to expand...

Well, there's also the matter of the Creditistes in Quebec--whose sorta-heirs also happen to be a fair segment of the Quebec Tory caucus in Ottawa (as well as ADQ provincially)

toronjohn said:

Mind pointing out where I've been arguing "against hate"

Nice to see that you allow yourself to make typo's / mistakes
but you refuse to extend that to others...

toronjohn

Click to expand...

So, are you telling me that you're arguing *on behalf of* hate? Like, hate is good?

Toronjohn, now you're really behaving like those kooky fringe nutcases who gets 0.001% of the mayoral vote against David Miller...

Haha. Adma, you're good.

So then.. did he renounce his late teen / and well into his 20's ( hardly childhhood ) beliefs, because he wanted to go to school in the states ( I believe a trip to Russia, and his love for dictators had him being refused entry... NO??? ) or did he start to see the world like the rest of us.

Click to expand...

Kay, why don't you go ahead and read some of your books you're trying to cite. I'm not going to take away their royalties/wasting my time by doing it for you. He had conservative Catholic beliefs while he went to a very traditional Catholic high school in Quebec. Once he was done high school, he went to Harvard and got out of the rather stifling atmosphere of pre-Quiet Revolution Quebec. His views then shifted dramatically to the anti-nationalist that we knew from his years in politics.

And just to make it clearer, you "believe" incorrectly. You really have no clue what you're talking about. He most certainly had not taken any trips to Russia between high school and Harvard.

I was thinking with these By-elections coming up soon, when is Dion prepared to trigger an election?

Posted: March 08, 2008, 7:30 PM by Jonathan Kay

"It's a bad government and we'll choose a time to defeat this bad government. You will see. But it will not be at this time where we have a snowstorm in Ontario and just before Easter. I don't think Canadians want that."
- Stephane Dion, March 7, 2008

"It's a bad government and we'll choose a time to defeat this bad government. You will see. But it will not be at this time where we have summer vacation about to start -- not to mention the NHL and NBA playoffs. I don't think Canadians want that."
- Stephane Dion, May 7, 2008

"It's a bad government and we'll choose a time to defeat this bad government. You will see. But not during hay-fever season. Half my caucus is on Benadryl and... well, trust me, it's just not a good time."
- Stephane Dion, August 7, 2008

"It's a bad government and we'll choose a time to defeat this bad government. You will see. But the rest of the year really doesn't look good. Tomorrow is Yom Kippur. Then we've got Birth of the B'ab -- no, I'd never heard of it either, but apparently it's a B'hai thing. Plus, Simhat Torah, Diwali, the Wiccan festival of Samhain, the holiday honouring Guru Tegh Bahadur's martyrdom, the Ascension of 'Abdu'l-Baha, and then the Hajj, Chanukkah and Christmas ... You get the picture. Hey -- Why don't you get back to me in 2009? February or March could work ... you know, if the weather is ok."
- Stephane Dion, October 7, 2008

Probably not anytime soon.

^ Heh heh. That's actually pretty funny.

LOL. That is good.

"It's a bad government and we'll choose a time to defeat this bad government. You will see. But not during hay-fever season. Half my caucus is on Benadryl and... well, trust me, it's just not a good time."

Roffle!

I haven't been out in TC this week but it appears that the NDP has a very strong candidate in El-Farouk Khaki (though it seems like a suicide run against high-profile Rae), who is well known in the gay community, though I don't think he'll fly with more socially conservative Somalis and Bangladeshis. The Green vote, meanwhile, may benefit from those ex-PC types who are upset about the removal of Mark Warner and don't want to vote for a fundamentalist preacher (who is just about the worst fit for the riding!) My feeling is Rae will have an above-average showing north of Bloor, as his patrician style and credentials will go over there better than Don Meredith.

The Tory is a fundamentalist preacher?

Fundamentalist is a stretch, but he is a preacher.

From Wiki...

Don Meredith (born 1964)[1] is a political candidate, an ordained minister[1] in Canada and chair of the GTA Faith Alliance which focuses on the issue of youth violence, particularly involving gangs and guns.[2][3][4][5]The GTA Faith Alliance has organized peace rallies in the Malvern and Rexdale communities of Toronto following incidents of violence as well as organizing town hall meetings on related community issues.[2]

Click to expand...

Clearly Don is simply in as a sacrificial lamb. And the Tories clearly made sure he was black after the Harper "I didn't know Mark Warner was black" comment (despite a photo of them two together).

The thing is Mark Warner was a sacrificial lamb as well. It's not as if the Conservatives have even the slightest chance of taking the riding, even if Warner has deluded himself into believing so.

Dear lord, Bill on Logan has got it nailed. This is absolutely ridiculous. The Liberal grassroots desperately want an election, most of the MPs want an election, the leader wants an election. Why the hell aren't we having an election?!?!?!?!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Easter not the right time to bring down government, Liberals say

BILL CURRY

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

March 11, 2008 at 10:53 PM EDT

OTTAWA — Liberals cited the coming Easter weekend for not defeating the government this week in a budget showdown over education savings tax breaks — but vowed a spring election could soon follow.

The House of Commons is expected to vote as early as tomorrow on a budget motion that includes a new clause aimed at embarrassing the Liberals. The clause effectively erases a Liberal bill passed last week by a united opposition that would make payments to Registered Education Savings Plans tax deductible.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said the Liberal plan risks a deficit and had to be stopped.

"It's up to me as Finance Minister, on behalf of the government, to maintain the integrity of the budget plan," he said.

Liberal finance critic John McCallum yesterday cited Easter as a key reason why his party won't trigger an election this week, meaning Liberals will once again face taunts and jeers from their opponents in the House as they abstain in large numbers on a confidence vote.

"I think our position is very clear," Mr. McCallum told reporters yesterday shortly after Mr. Flaherty tabled his motion. "We have said we won't bring the government down this week, before Easter. But when the Budget Implementation Bill goes to committee, that could be April, May … we will certainly consider our options at that time."

The senior Liberal acknowledged publicly yesterday what several Liberals have been saying privately: the current strategy of mass abstentions on key votes is not sitting well.

"I think a number of Liberals do feel uncomfortable in the position that we're in but we're playing for the longer term," he said. "I think we are accepting the leadership of our leader and we are happily but slightly uncomfortably voting the way we have been voting."

Just two weeks after dodging an election over the federal budget, Liberal MPs head behind closed doors this morning to debate whether the education savings issue changes the party's election plans.

When the budget was first released, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion declared he would let it pass because Canadians don't want an election. But several Liberal caucus members said yesterday they are revising their plans in light of Mr. Flaherty's latest twist.

Several Liberal MPs have quietly expressed frustration at repeatedly abstaining on confidence votes. The Liberal savings bill, put forward by Liberal MP Dan McTeague, would give tax deductions to parents who contribute up to $5,000 per child into a Registered Education Savings Plan. The government warns the measure would cost $900-million a year and risk a federal deficit.

Liberal Senator David Smith said Mr. Flaherty's move is a major development that will trigger new considerations for the party in terms of timing the next election.

"There will be a caucus meeting [this morning] and I'm sure it will be discussed and obviously a decision will be made on that," he said.

With the House of Commons set to adjourn Friday for two weeks, several Liberals said yesterday they are likely to delay a final decision until they return. At that point, four by-elections will have taken place, on March 17. If the Liberals do well, they would be more likely to defeat the government on a subsequent budget vote in April.

Liberal MP Bryon Wilfert said his party has long said it will choose the issue for triggering the next campaign. The question is whether to go on the budget and education savings.

"It's an important issue I'm sure for Canadians," he said. "Is this the hill to die on? I don't know."

With a report from Campbell Clark