Comments on: Hear The Lamentations Of Their Women

By: dan

dan — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 04:32:35 +0000

Generally speaking, any time you’re working from the assumption of a given Republican not being crazy, you’re wrong.

By: Evan

Evan — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:30:13 +0000

Chuck Strahl is a moderate? He represents essentially the next city over, and I have never seen any signs of him being a moderate. He’s less crazy than Randy White, certainly– not that that’s hard.

(Then again, it could be that he’s moderate compared to the alternatives, whom I don’t know as well)

By: clay

clay — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 09:30:25 +0000

I don’t know that performing exorcisms would prevent one from being a rising star in the Republican party.

By: LurkerWithout

LurkerWithout — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 09:10:24 +0000

What is Canada a Dominion of anyway? Is it because you still do what the Queen says if she asks nicely?

By: John

John — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 06:18:59 +0000

Uh, Bobby Jindal is weapons-grade crazy and everyone knows it. The dude *performs exorcisms*.

By: Coren

Coren — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 02:50:22 +0000

I like posts about Canadian politics because they are at the same time both interesting and somewhat incomprehensible – mostly because I am too lazy to go look up how the political system works up there.

By: Grazzt

Grazzt — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 02:40:52 +0000

I remember one of Rick Mercer’s rants where he mentions that the Conservatives were talking about Jim Prentice as their next leader, so Harper responded by giving him a shitty cabinet position (Environment).

By: clay

clay — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 02:09:57 +0000

RABID ideologue. I don’t know that Bobby Jindal is particularly fast paced.

By: clay

clay — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 02:07:21 +0000

You know, this is the same problem that the Republican party in the U.S. has. If you look at the Republicans who ran for President, it was a group that had no fresh face or, more importantly, fresh ideas. Who is their bench? Who is going to turn them around and pull them out of their electoral morass? Frighteningly, I think Sarah Palin WAS the bench.

When I hear names floated for a 2012 run, the most common name mentioned (other than Palin) is Newt Gingrich. Newt Gingrich! If that who the GOP is banking their future on, then they are more screwed than I thought. The slavish devotion to Newt’s playbook is what brought them to their current mess. (That, and marching lockstep with the biggest failure of a president since Hoover.)

The Republican I know of that could possibly be an exception is Jindal, from Louisiana. He’s young and seems competent. More importantly, he doesn’t seem like a rapid ideologue. I think my governor, Charlie Crist (FL) would also qualify, except for the whole, you know, probably being secretly gay thing.

By: Piranhtachew

Piranhtachew — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 01:23:57 +0000

Which Earth had the Democratic convention in Saint Paul last year?

By: SC

SC — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 01:22:38 +0000

I think your point actually is in Reid’s article, where he says that without Harper the party is a collection of weirdos and “Red Tory desperates” (by the way, converting adjectives into nouns like that is a favourite linguistic style).

Prentice would seem the best choice to me, though, as you say, he’s never going to be a so-con favourite.

By: Rian Fike

Rian Fike — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 00:40:09 +0000

This may not be politically correct for this topic, but what superheroes have the love of Barack and Michelle?

Chime in here:

http://fullbodytransplant.wordpress.com/2008/11/30/superheroes-in-love-barack-and-michelle-save-the-world/

Much obliged.

By: Tlönista

Tlönista — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 23:35:15 +0000

Dipshit-Canadians, unfortunately, seem to be overrepresented in national politics. But yes, nobody is going to seriously consider Doris for PM.

By: lawnmower boy

lawnmower boy — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 21:39:18 +0000

You know, to have a real democracy, you gotta have two parties that can field a cabinet bench. The only way that’s going to happen is if the Conservatives last long enough to finally attract some good politicians.
So, go Stephen Harper, you slimy bastich arsehole!
Also, we don’t need a stimulus package, and I will be mightily cheesed off if this country returns to structural deficits.
Although that seems to be a bipartisan effort, right now.

By: MGK

MGK — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 20:53:51 +0000

Looking at the recent history in the UK, from 1999-2001, our three main party leaders had all been leaders from about that age.

There’s a difference between “leader of a political party” and “leader of a viable political party.”

With the exception of Blair – who was essentially 44 when he actually took office – every single one of those leaders was not going to be Prime Minister at such a young age and the country knew it. Cameron similarly won’t be elected to anything before he’s about as old.

The same thing happened here in Canada when Jean Charest was elected leader of the Progressive Conservatives; the party was in a rebuilding stage and everybody knew it, so it didn’t matter that Charest barely had to shave. But it becomes a different kettle of fish when the leader in question actively stands a shot at being in charge of the whole damn country.

Hague was a joke, Kennedy was a Lib Dem and therefore never going to be in charge of anything, and Salmond being in charge of the “fourth or fifth biggest party” in a system that is essentially two-party with a few additional flavours for variety isn’t that big a deal. I think my point stands.