NATO role spells trouble for Harper

[CHIMO]

After wisely staying out of the Iraq war, Canada is being drawn toward the Middle East quagmire that is its aftermath. One step deeper is the suggestion that NATO troops should be deployed in Lebanon — a bad idea with troubling implications at home as well as abroad.

For many Canadians, the suggested Atlantic alliance intervention and its underlying motivation must be as confusing as the other chaotic events of the past two weeks. But once deconstructed, it provides a kind of idiot's guide to what's unfolding in a region that is never easy to understand.

But playing the tough guy would jeopardize Canada's international image as well as the support, particularly in Quebec, the Prime Minister hopes will deliver a majority.

Harper originally saw merit and strength in the Iraq blunder. A second chance now looms to make the same chilling mistake.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1153737787581&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795

So where is the PC in the Conservatives? One of the themes at the time of the merger, aka takeover, was how can one influence the direction if one is not inside the tent. So it seems everyone is singing from the same book or most have given up singing.

[MrPrax]

1. Thx for the memory...

Oh yeah the PCs influence in the big tent!!

I never believed that canard...it was the Reformers floating it to make the pill easier to swallow.

I thought that one was funny...because it was/is the same tactic 'progressives' and social democrats used to justify their 'move' to the Right.

In that form, moving to the Right is a sign of political maturity!! You can't influence anything if your still on the street outside, you have to get inside. Translation: Don't fuck up our chances of selling out and making a big pile of cash.

God I have lost track of how many NDPers I've known in the old days of the party, that used this shit to avoid substantive discussion on 'what they actually believe'. You discovered that they were ALWAYS on the inside to begin with and you can't come in.

Yeah--Did anyone really believed that MacKay or Orchard was a symbol of true Progressive Conservative values...LOL

The Rubes got snookered...

[IntravenousDemilo]

2. And you are lumping David Orchard in with MacKay... exactly... why?

They are, and always were, on opposite sides of the fence. Are you positing that Orchard was from the Reform party or something? Because no...

[MrPrax]

3. Now I know your nuts...

I lumped them together cause they BOTH ran for leadership for the Progressive Conservative Party?

If you missed that simple part, then on what basis could possibly even speak to either of their politics and be taken seriously?

A Tory is A Tory is A Tory...perhaps your are confused by their plummage?

[IntravenousDemilo]

4. No, you will never know my nuts unless you are an exceptionally hot fella.

And probably not even then, 'cause I'm taken. Unless you like three-ways.

Listen, I was there at the leadership convention as an Orchard supporter and scrutineer. I was in the same room when David got MacKay to agree in writing not to merge the party with the CRAP, an agreement that, as you may recall, MacKay almost immediately thereafter broke. There's difference #1.

David was roughed up by Mulroney's boys during the free-trade debate in 1988. In comparison, MacKay's dad Elmer was a Mulroney cabinet minister. There's difference #2.

David wants to scrap the Canada-US "free-trade" agreement. MacKay seems to think it the best thing since sliced bread. There's difference #3.

David is firmly against involvement in both Iraq and Afghanistan. MacKay is a hawk. There's difference #4.

David has been an environmentalist and an organic farmer for decades. MacKay has the typical neocon attitude towards such things. There's difference #5.

David is a strong Canadian nationalist (read his book The Fight for Canada: Four Centuries of Resistance to American Expansionism). MacKay would be perfectly happy to be a rose on Condi Rice's lapel, much as his boss assumes the position (pants down, hands firmly grasping ankles) every time Condi's boss reaches for his belt buckle. There's difference #6.

David moved over to the Liberal Party of Canada before the last federal election, and I have followed him. MacKay so far has yet to do so. There's difference #7.

Need I go on?

[Spazito]

5. Well done!

I agree with you, there is no comparison between the two. Orchard fought hard to keep the PC party out of Reform's hands and he was stabbed in the back by MacKay. He is, as you stated, the antithesis of Peter MacKay.

[CHIMO]

6. Disagree

I don't think McKay has two brain cells that agree with anything other than he is a clown of Mulroney and they are pulling the strings waiting to take over. He is no more a hawk than a dove.

He is an it.

[MrPrax]

7. So what...

This might be something YOU think...me...I ain't Tory. Good...I agree. Neither are very good Progressive Conservatives including David Orchard. So what.

You make a good point

They both claim to be Progressive Conservatives...you want to call MacKay a Blue Tory, or a hack or an imbecile or treasonous scum, go right ahead ...and you'd be right.

But MacKay considered himself a Progressive Conservative!!! I didn't make him think he was one and neither did you.

That's why I can't figure out why you posted what you did...Orchard did seem to me closer to the 'red tory' part of the Progressive Conservatives than MacKay. But alot of OTHER PCers thought MacKay was a PCer just as well.

Your rap is fine...I didn't think it was a legit reply to my simple statement:

Yeah--Did anyone really believed that MacKay or Orchard was a symbol of true Progressive Conservative values...LOL

But while we are on the subject -- not a whole lot of Tories think much of Orchard, so MacKay (the much more popular of the two among Progressive Conservatives as he won the leadership) is considered to be more Progressive Conservative than Orchard according to your OWN party.

Unless you are saying that people in political conventions knowingly vote for someone that doesn't reflect the values of their party, then I can't help you.

I don't think Layton is much of a social democrat...he seems like a liberal to me and possibly closer to a Red Tory than many in the NDP...so

Yeah--Did anyone really believed that Blaikie or Layton was a symbol of true New Democrat values...LOL

I don't have a lot of respect for these guys in toto ... especially in Canada where they change parties and principles as often as most change their underwear.

Even Orchard is a little hard to take seriously with his flirtation of both Liberal and NDP parties and I personally think Orchard is a self-promoting flake who has had his fifteen minutes. MacKay is a sleazy opportunist who still young enough to consider becoming a 'Charest' Liberal.

So there... ;-)

(on edit --oh and I am indeed impressed by your backroom player status...your rap was well worth the reply...in fact some of that 'insider' feel to politics is sorely missing around here...

...and you get MrPrax's highest award: a beer and two rocks

:toast:
:yourock: :yourock: