Jump to content
Jambands.ca

Harper following example of US


\/\/illy
 Share

Recommended Posts

...and working to mute the effect of soldiers lost in Afghanistan.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/04/25/soldiers-return-media060425.html

What was that quote of his? "From peacekeepers to peacemakers," wasn't it? I liked being referred to as peacekeepers. Peacemakers makes me think about one of my favourite anit-war slogans: Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity!

I want my Canada back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

all of you that voted for harper should be the ones over there at war dieing!

Maybe I should go. When it comes to Afganistan... I'd take the Canadian way, over the Taliban, as far as the logistics in winning a war there, we're in trouble now due to limited American support because of America's quagmire in Iraq... not that anyone who posts on this boards gives a rats ass about the American Military, but I do, especially as it relates to the Canadian Troops and their capabilities vs. the size and tactics of the REAL combatants. I will say Canada should not of gone to Iraq, and neither should the States. They should of focused on Afganistan and done the job. It was an actual Global decicion to go to Afganistan, with dozens of Nations taking part, and a Canadian General was named in charge of the whole opperation. Too bad the States got restless and impatcient and decided to take all their toys away. It's really left us in a tough spot. So in regards to Harper following Example of US... That's Bullshit. He's supporting our troops and giving their families and friends a right to a little respect and privacy to help support them through the grieving process... and maybe, just maybe that means that this increased respect devoted to those brave soilders that have fallen will translate into an increased respect to the soilders that are still over there, like it or not, serving you and your country.

I support the Canadian Military, and I don't need to see video of dead bodies coming off a plane to entrench the idea of what a loss of life is like. It's unfair to assume that anyone with a pro-Harper stance is an inhumane killing machine willing to sacrifice real lives for no good reason. But with all the lame one liners around here, I can see the opposistion really doesn't have much of a grasp of anything other than apathy and anger. If you're grumpy go back to bed... otherwise keep your head up, cause this Harper ride is going to be a roller coaster... not like the tea cups we had under the libs. And I for one see no reason why Harpers approval ratings have not gone up. (regardless of what prejudgements individuals round these parts may have already made). He's shown he's human, has a sense of humor, is willing to play by the books, and is not afraid to take a couple chances. He's also allowed the opposition time and time to shoot themselves in their own foot. I think the Liberals are done, and signifficant opposition to Harper over the next 4 years will come from the NDP, and thankfully cause of the minority, we will have concensus legislation... it won't be as bad as you think.

~W

PS: I'm only prepared to reply to responses over 500 words in length... I used to get too worked up about the loaded one or two pharse retorts common in these web forums... I think that these do similar kinds of propagandic damage as the techniques I have seen over at the free dominion... just from the "other extreme" whatever the fuck that means

And as Far as Harper is comming from... to see how he makes decisions is not frightening... it's predictable... you see he uses the letter of the law to guide his choices... IS THAT SO BAD?! If not, maybe it's not Canada you want to live in... or maybe you're a pirate... :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Liberals are done, and signifficant opposition to Harper over the next 4 years will come from the NDP, and thankfully cause of the minority, we will have concensus legislation... it won't be as bad as you think.

(I assure you this is not a personal reaction from your comments about the Libs)

The NDP is and always will be "done" with their historic high 19 out of 308 seats, and literal and complete un-electability in well over 75% of the country (acknowledged by the NDP themselves who only consider around 60 ridings in the country to be winnable - which is also a joke)

19 out of 308 seats gets you the back corner of the Commons and about 3 questions about a half hour into Question Period - God help us if that's the only opposition to Harper.

Besides, so far in this Parliament the NDP has targeted the Liberals instead of Harper, as they think they can pick up support from the "weakened leaderless" Liberal Party. Harper is already pandering for support from the NDP (ie. the near verbatim inclusion of Layton's issues in the Speech from the Throne) so they can hold onto power while they work on their plan to get a majority in the next election in Quebec. The NDP is barely a pawn let alone a player, they are a political fart in the wind.

I get tired of people peddling the snake-oil like belief that voting NDP will actually produce results - they will never form a Gov't, and like the Green Party, split the progressive vote and hand power to a party with beliefs that 2/3rds of Canadians are against. The Liberal Party is far from perfect, but the Conservatives would have a tough time electing anybody outside of Alberta if the progressive vote went to one party.

I hate the NDP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NDP is and always will be "done" with their historic high 19 out of 308 seats

Just a nitpick, but the historic high seatcount was 43 under Broadbent. And damn well almost formed government, too, except that the Libs fibbed a bit about being against free-trade.

I agree with most of the rest that you say, particularly about what the NDP represents at the moment in terms of any sort of effective opposition (zip).

About the last paragraph though, the NDP would split the progressive vote if there were progressive parties to be split. Perhaps under new leardership and trying to claw their way out from under a conservative government, the Liberals will fashion themselves a progressive party for a time. That's fine. But the NDP did not split a progressive vote because there was no progressive vote to be split.

If voting for the party that actually represents something even approximating the results you would like to see produces no results, we need to re-evaluate the system (and question ourselves as to why we are one of the last countries still using FPTP in a Parliamentary democracy). It's fine for you (or anyone else) to hate the NDP, just like it's fine for you (or anyone else) to hate the CPC, just like it is fine for anyone to hate the Liberals. But other people *don't* hate them, and those other people should *count*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(I assure you this is not a personal reaction from your comments about the Libs)

Your syntax is so open for criticisim this should be fun. You're trying to tell me this isn't personal? Am I still talking to Captain Liberal? I'll assume though because of your comments about the NDP, that you're really only a one party guy. In fact, if you had things your way, there would only be one party: The Liberals. Yikes!

For me I kinda feel that way about the leafs in hockey. I hate the leafs, the decisions they make, and even if they do somethign kinda good, I can still manage to find a negative to focus on and feed my distaste. If I had things my way... the Senators would win every year. But when it comes to politics... something far less a "game"... I don't feel the same way. I like that there are many parties advocating many groups and playing the "game" of politics. I think it enriches our system when there are more parties. I think a multi party system is the way to go... in sharp contrast to your Fashist alternative (I too never thought I would say it but alas, the logic has lead us to this bitter conclusion of your remarks)... The more I think of it, I'm thankful that the Leafs are there... cause it gives us a chance to play them, and to prove we are a better team... the same goes for Federal Politics... only I think it would be better for the "league" if it had more than two teams... which thankfully it does.

The NDP is and always will be "done" with their historic high 19 out of 308 seats, and literal and complete un-electability in well over 75% of the country (acknowledged by the NDP themselves who only consider around 60 ridings in the country to be winnable - which is also a joke)

Just look at the isreali Parlimentary system to see how a party with only 5% of the vote hold the balance of power, and affect every single bit of legislation that runs through it. Thankfully the NDP are not guided by the same priciple as it's isreali counterpart.

19 out of 308 seats gets you the back corner of the Commons and about 3 questions about a half hour into Question Period - God help us if that's the only opposition to Harper.

Didn't realize you were so religious. [color:purple]And yeah, question period is where the real action happens anyways. I always thought the most important thing in politics was the wording on legislation, and if the Conservatives want to appeal to the NDP and Bloc (why even bother appealing to the Liberals with no leader, no dignity, and a mandate to diametrically oppose the conservatives), they will have to word legislation appropritaley. For the record, I hope Canada never has a majority government again.

Besides, so far in this Parliament the NDP has targeted the Liberals instead of Harper, as they think they can pick up support from the "weakened leaderless" Liberal Party. Harper is already pandering for support from the NDP (ie. the near verbatim inclusion of Layton's issues in the Speech from the Throne) so they can hold onto power while they work on their plan to get a majority in the next election in Quebec. The NDP is barely a pawn let alone a player, they are a political fart in the wind.

Good, the Liberals need to be picked on. And good, concensus legislation is alive and well. "Fart in the Wind"?! NDP are real people, with real families...

I get tired of people peddling the snake-oil like belief that voting NDP will actually produce results - they will never form a Gov't, and like the Green Party, split the progressive vote and hand power to a party with beliefs that 2/3rds of Canadians are against. The Liberal Party is far from perfect, but the Conservatives would have a tough time electing anybody outside of Alberta if the progressive vote went to one party.

You, my friend, are all smoke and mirrors... perhaps a big spoonful of co-operation, and respect is what you could use! Snake Oil!!! ROTFL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not to mention the liberal party, and perhaps logically those who support and work for them relied heavily on the NDP to survive in the last parliament. they weren't so bad then were they? or they're just no good when the Liberals can't get anything from them to help themselves?

i don't pretend to know as much about politics or the inside workings of the Hill as will or hux or d_rawk, but i think will hit it on the head with co-operation and respect. The liberals didn't earn any of mine with the whole paul martin shenanigans, so what if he inherited his problems from Chretien. True leaders rise above. I didn't vote for Harper but I like what he's done so far, with a few exceptions (relations with the media being a top one). Time will tell what his vision and impact are on all of us.

And I support the troops in Afghanistan 100%. Give them some money and equipment and support at home ferchrissakes.

AD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PS: I'm only prepared to reply to responses over 500 words in length... I used to get too worked up about the loaded one or two pharse retorts common in these web forums... I think that these do similar kinds of propagandic damage as the techniques I have seen over at the free dominion... just from the "other extreme" whatever the fuck that means

Hey Will, if I say something you disagree with or think is just flat out fucked please call me on it. This isn't the first reference to "anti-Haper" comments you've made and you seem to condemn them all out of hand. I can assure that my disapproval of Harper is sincere and I am not blowing smoke for the sake of rallying the troops, or whatever other end you think I might be trying to gain with "Free Dominion-style" propaganda.

It's unfair to assume that anyone with a pro-Harper stance is an inhumane killing machine willing to sacrifice real lives for no good reason.

Just like it's unfair to assume that anti-Harper equals anti-military support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Will, if I say something you disagree with or think is just flat out fucked please call me on it. This isn't the first reference to "anti-Haper" comments you've made and you seem to condemn them all out of hand. I can assure that my disapproval of Harper is sincere and I am not blowing smoke for the sake of rallying the troops, or whatever other end you think I might be trying to gain with "Free Dominion-style" propaganda.

It's unfair to assume that anyone with a pro-Harper stance is an inhumane killing machine willing to sacrifice real lives for no good reason.

Just like it's unfair to assume that anti-Harper equals anti-military support.

Well, he is the leader of our troops... he has inherited the situation, regardless of what you assume he may have done if he was in power when they were sent.

I find that one liners amount to a pat on the back, and that there's not alot of well forumlated arguments around the issue. I just find things really slanted to a homogeonous view, which I:

a) Find dangerous

B) Similar, but from a different slant to the threads I've seen over at Free Dominion.

He's just got in power, but it seems like around here the drums of doom have been sounding for a while. I just refuse to believe it's that bad, and it sucks when everyone else seems to be patting each other on the back supporting this idea of an "evil new world order", and linking harper to being a petting boy for the Bush administration. I simply don't buy these arguments. And since there's a small few other than myself who ever pipe in atleast some kind of balance to these discussions, it gets alienating... perhaps like a Hippie would feel over at FreeDominion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, he is the leader of our troops...

That job actually belongs to Michaëlle Jean ... ;)

I realize that I'm far below the 500 word count cutoff, but seriously dude, FD is bad for the soul. Best to just stay clear away. The world looks and feels so much uglier after visiting that place. I mean, you could stick your finger in an open flame ... but why actually do it?

As far as the flag situation, and more importantly in my mind, the disallowing of media coverage for the visible trappings of fallen soliders, it *is* a play out of the Bush administrations playbook. The problem seems to me that it is so obviously politically inexpedient in the shortterm - and Harper is a bright enough man to realize as much - that it most certainly must be calculated against future political gains. Which isn't much of a surprise because the man is obviously going to do what he can to form a majority the next time around, as we should expect him to. But that future political gain seems to be banking on collective blindness against the actual costs of military involvement. This is quite aside from debates about the merit of such involvement. This is about keeping people from thinking about those costs or feeling them.

Of the many things I expected to be disappointed or in disagreement with Harper about, devaluing the lives of the men and women in service was certainly not one of them. Think of what the hysterical reaction would have been if Paul Martin had introduced these same policies! He would have been painted as the devil incarnate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh totally, I'm not impressed at free dominion ... cause it's one sided(the only time I visited there was the brief introduction I got through the Jambands Episode), and in their own little world they have absolute control and through their methods maintain a kind of censorship... But it gets that way here from time to time... not the same flavour, and not the same resolve, but it gets VERY Slanted... you only have to look at the Jambands exit poll for the election to get the idea. I respect debate, but most comments made are more like school yard jabs. Or off the cuff comments that are said as if the writer assumes everyone knows what they mean. But very little facts are brought up, and arguments about complex issues are summarized into a sentance or two?! One reason I got into working in music is because I thought it brought people together. I've learned now that it only seems to bring SOME people together. Well kinda, still the food of the ears and all that, but man the divisions are solid. Too bad...

As far as the Harper thing... perhaps this is a "Bush dulling the impact on the population so we don't question their involvment." But just look at the debate alone that it has sparked (and I haven't even had time to pick up a paper yet today!!)... so if his goal was to silence the population or to lead to a lesser awareness... he failed. I don't believe that was his goal.

As far as the rules go... it's on the books. That's the policy... the flag doesn't get lowered on Parliament hill except for three things. It had just casually changed custom, but the rule never offically changed... perhaps the Liberals should of done that in the 12 years they had a majority (definately ad hoc, but seems to ring true considering Harpers just out of the gates). Now if you think we should change the rule, then Parliment is where you do it. Have a debate, reach a concensus, and change the rule, until then, the point the leader is trying to make is we do things by the book, and since we are the institution which creates the rules, we better abide by them. Now how this applies to the pot debate is a serious issue I believe to most around these parts. So perhaps we should start formulating some real good arguments, and becomming real careful in how we deal, because, atleast you know where he's coming from. That aside, Harpers going to have a lot of looking inwards at the Parliamentary institution and fixing things there before he'll ever get a chance to flex his social standards on the masses... and in the meantime the beat will go on... and the Grey Area's remain...

Besides... The storm clouds are gathering... global Recession is right around the corner. I'm glad I work in music... we really should be talking about this more. There's really only so many times you can go to the well, but atleast everyone is primed to blame Harper for this when the Economy goes to a radial shift (Recessions for some, Opportunity for others)... but on the other end thankfully will be environmental sustainability. The pain you will feel is actually becoming unadicted to the "The American Way", I know this is getting way off base, but I LOVE these debates, they spark so many synthesis in my mind, and although I can see a tough road ahead, I see a long future too, and I just wish the tone (NOT you persoanlly D_Rawk, you have a fine world view, and well forumlated thoughts) would have more perfect fifths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And since there's a small few other than myself who ever pipe in atleast some kind of balance to these discussions, it gets alienating... perhaps like a Hippie would feel over at FreeDominion.

That's funny because that's how I usually feel after reading one of your diatribes where you paint all anti-Harper sentiment with the same brush and dismiss it out of hand because it doesn't coincide with your point of view. I respect your opinion and your ability to formulate it so well. And I'm glad Birdy is around to keep this forum honest and not too "preachy to the choir". And I believe AD called out one of the wild remarks in this thread before you joined it. So I don't see where the alienation comes from.

You almost seem surprised that there is predominantly anti-Harper sentiment on a web site called jambands.ca and feel the need to chastize us for it. I guess it's the last part of that which sticks in my craw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You almost seem surprised that there is predominantly anti-Harper sentiment on a web site called jambands.ca and feel the need to chastize us for it.

At the risk of pulling off a one-liner, nowhere do my musical tastes and political leanings share the same plane of reference. I imagine Will feels the same way, as it's really the only logical way to feel, wouldn't you agree? Are you making the assumption that everyone who listens to "Jambands" (still a funny term for me) is anti-Harper (whatever that means)?

AD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[That's funny because that's how I usually feel after reading one of your diatribes where you paint all anti-Harper sentiment with the same brush and dismiss it out of hand because it doesn't coincide with your point of view.

I think Will has articulated more than you give him credit for; he wrote of specific things in Harper's realm that he likes and why he likes it. What's the problem there? Instead of countering his point with a point of your own you attack his perceived style instead of substance.

Hardly a diatribe... Unless you disagree of course.

AD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You almost seem surprised that there is predominantly anti-Harper sentiment on a web site called jambands.ca and feel the need to chastize us for it.

At the risk of pulling off a one-liner' date=' nowhere do my musical tastes and political leanings share the same plane of reference. I imagine Will feels the same way, as it's really the only logical way to feel, wouldn't you agree? Are you making the assumption that everyone who listens to "Jambands" (still a funny term for me) is anti-Harper (whatever that means)?

AD

[/quote']

Don't be coy AD. I'm speaking in generalities and you know it. You had no idea the broad hippie movement is typically (but not always) associated with the left? And that jambands are typically (but not always) associated with hippies?

I'm just saying, if I peruse a Ted Nugent site I'm not gonna be surprised that a majority of the posters support the NRA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[That's funny because that's how I usually feel after reading one of your diatribes where you paint all anti-Harper sentiment with the same brush and dismiss it out of hand because it doesn't coincide with your point of view.

I think Will has articulated more than you give him credit for; he wrote of specific things in Harper's realm that he likes and why he likes it. What's the problem there? Instead of countering his point with a point of your own you attack his perceived style instead of substance.

Hardly a diatribe... Unless you disagree of course.

AD

There's a lot of substance in what Will writes. I wasn't speaking to that. It's his way of sneaking in attacks against the anti-Harper crowd as if we can be painted with the same brush that gets my back up. I also think it undermines his point.

Diatribe = "A bitter, abusive denunciation"

Poor choice of words, I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough... I suppose it's my wish to have more like minded people in the community who are willing to see the upside to the current administration, and would rally behind it. It's no coincidence that I work in the buisness of music, and have strong pro-conservative views. As far as government ideology goes...

The conservatives support the removal of trade barriers through NAFTA... Bands have a hard time getting accross the border to play... local bands have a limited cynical audience to play too (jaded by the Media cetrability in Toronto)... people here complain why shows cost to much and why every band that exists isn't good enough. If only we could get our bands, (who are all great in my mind), a little more exposre and tap into unique markets in Detroit, Clevland, and Buffalo on a regular basis, then their development would progress in leaps and bounds, and maybe some of the Rich taste music fans would be apised by some local talent. Enough so that they can make a living on their music and not have to work a 2nd Job (which to me seems the norm right here right now)... and then just see how good these bands can get... a little coin to get some new gear... and adoring fan base... and all the time in the world to make music (I kinda think that's what Phish was all about, and look how happy their tunes were) Now lets get that going for a band NOT from the suburbs, howabout Toronto? and howabout more than one. I for sure believe that if the Burties were allowed to party their way Across the USA on a regular basis, they would be HUGE. But instead they have to go to Winnipeg (futher from Toronto than Nashville), to get to their next "big town show", or risk ending up in Jail in the USA on some BS possession charge.

This is just one of many reasons why I, advocating for grassroots music in and around the place I live, believe that the conservative have the best tool set to help out this particular community. I know I know... how selfish... [color:purple]and yes Bombs must rain down on Babylon for this to happen. I'm just having a real hard time getting anyone to agree with even just a little of what I say... well maybe they do, but they are afraid to post it. Even the aformentioned Birdy and AD...

As far as having AD as the "watchdog" in this and other threads... he and I are friends in person, and have gone to the tilt a time or two, eye to eye, only to be open minded enough to respect each other at the end of the day, and make concessions in how we get along. I suppose never knowing someone in real life and getting to it online is a personal experience... and I certainly don't want to make you feel alienated... I suppose I was forced into making a response after what Baj said... particularly wishing death on someone who held the beliefs I do hold. Forgive me for being a little sensitive... and Baj, if you're out there, I know you in person... and of course I'd never wish you any harm... but it does illustrate how careful maybe one should be when they speak up, and in no way do I think that AD properly diffused the situation for the optics that it held towards my own personal well being. I can assure Ollie, that in no way would I ever wish you personal harm... if I make you feel alienated, I'm sorry, but surely you must respect that someone, wether they thought about the consequences or not, said in a public forum that they wished death on someone who voted conservative. I know this person really wouldn't mean that because of the times we have hung out, but character rarely shines though a message board so much as the words do, especially to a casual observer/lurker or as I like to call them... the audience... there are far more people who just come here and read then take the time to post... with all the flaming that happens I can respect that... just like I respect how it's hard for a musician to get up on stage, and how easy it is to just sit there and watch. I try to be careful with my words, and respect others... I suppose I have actually felt assulted, or ignored here, and I don't like it cause it seems like the view... the one of the party in power in this Web community is visicously slanted, and like the "evil" and "anti" tags suggests... there's NO good that can come from that view point. You did ask for me to call you on it if you did... I respect that. I also appolgize for the wordiness... I only do it to clarify my points that from what I understand from others views of certain words needs much clarification. I would be nice to have a peacefully evolving debate on issues instead of intimidation... but this thread, and my desire to participate again in this general topic of conservatisim started when someone callously wished death upon my beliefs in a single breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...