How O'Bama affects Canada

[Walter]

MOB now in Canada

What else could force us to love Obama, yet ridicule Harper?
By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN
Last Updated: 6th November 2008, 4:19am
Greetings, fellow journalists, and welcome to the founding meeting of the Canadian chapter of The Media of Obama. Or, as we like to call ourselves, THE MOB, Canada.

As you know, THE MOB, Canada, will be operating as a subsidiary of its American parent, The Media of Obama, USA, (THE MOB, USA) for the foreseeable future.
Our job, as a branch plant of our American head office, will be to provide Canadians with objective news analysis of the glorious presidency of Barack Obama, compared to the disappointing prime ministership of Stephen Harper.
Inspired by the "news" judgment of former Democratic party strategist Chris Matthews, president of THE MOB, USA, who, during his duties co-anchoring MSNBC's coverage of the presidential primaries declared, upon hearing a speech by Obama: "My, I felt this thrill going up my leg! I mean, I don't have that too often!", we at THE MOB, Canada, will endeavour to bring similar objective news analysis to the table whenever comparing president-elect Obama to what's-his-name.
Our first order of business will be to wonder out loud -- ad nauseam -- why we can't have a leader as eloquent, wonderful, intelligent, sexy, glorious, transformational and messianic as Obama ... and then figure out if there's some way we can blame that on Harper, too.
From there, we will go on to inform Canadians of the many fundamental policy differences between president-elect Obama and the other guy.
For example, we must explain why Harper is evil, cruel, mean, homophobic and a closet Christian bigot for having supported civil unions for homosexuals, but not gay marriages, in Canada, while Obama is enlightened, wise, metrosexual and -- excuse me, I'm tearing up a bit, here -- Christ-like, for having supported civil unions, but not gay marriages, in the U.S.
This as indicated by Obama's totally secular remarks during his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2004, when he sensitively declared: "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman." (Source, Chicago Tribune, March 25, 2007).
LACKEY OF ALBERTA OIL
Next, we must emphasize that while Harper is an unscrupulous, evil, planet-killing, lackey of the Alberta oil industry for having previously opposed efforts to fight global warming, while today hypocritically claiming to be on side, Obama is an ethical, moral, green god for having previously voted, at the urging of the Illinois coal industry as an Illinois state senator in 1998, in favour of a bill condemning the Kyoto accord and prohibiting the state from regulating greenhouse gases, while today sincerely supporting efforts to combat global warming.
Finally, let us explain to our readers and listeners why Harper is an arrogant, imperialistic, jingoistic, death-monger for supporting the war in Afghanistan, while Obama is a humble, multilateralist, peace-seeking, saint for supporting the war in Afghanistan.
Yes, fellow members of THE MOB, our mission going forward is clear.
And remember, whenever comparing the two leaders, always remind your audience about how YOU felt the night Obama was elected president of the United States.
Because, after all, that's what's really important here ... Isn't it?
Sincerely,
Lorrie ('Obama Boy') Goldstein
President, THE MOB, Canada

 

[Praxius]

WTF are they smoking? The undigested straws of hay from cow sh*t?

Exactly what is their point in trying to compare Obama and Harper? Two different people, two different parties, two different ideals, two different countries.....

I hate the majority of Harper's plans and ideals, and while I do favor Obama over McCain, that doesn't mean I like all of his plans and ideals..... and that's the key factor there..... majority rules on voting for the lesser of evils.

I can bet that there will be some people who have enough free time to pick all the similarities between two people like Obama and Harper.... yet every single person is different no matter how you try and match them up.

All in all for myself, I don't need some stupid "Mob" group from the US to come to Canada to spew their crap about their own president they elected..... Most Canadians including myself do just fine on our own when it comes to finding crap to bitch about.

And besides... I gave Bush a few months into power before I started shatting all over him..... Obama has only been Prez-Elect for just a little over 24 hours now...... he hasn't even had a chance to screw anything up just yet..... cripes.... give me a break.

 

[china]

What else could force us to love Obama, yet ridicule Harper?

MOB now in Canada

What else could force us to love Obama, yet ridicule Harper?
By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN
Last Updated: 6th November 2008, 4:19am
Greetings, fellow journalists, and welcome to the founding meeting of the Canadian chapter of The Media of Obama. Or, as we like to call ourselves, THE MOB, Canada.

As you know, THE MOB, Canada, will be operating as a subsidiary of its American parent, The Media of Obama, USA, (THE MOB, USA) for the foreseeable future.
Our job, as a branch plant of our American head office, will be to provide Canadians with objective news analysis of the glorious presidency of Barack Obama, compared to the disappointing prime ministership of Stephen Harper.
Inspired by the "news" judgment of former Democratic party strategist Chris Matthews, president of THE MOB, USA, who, during his duties co-anchoring MSNBC's coverage of the presidential primaries declared, upon hearing a speech by Obama: "My, I felt this thrill going up my leg! I mean, I don't have that too often!", we at THE MOB, Canada, will endeavour to bring similar objective news analysis to the table whenever comparing president-elect Obama to what's-his-name.
Our first order of business will be to wonder out loud -- ad nauseam -- why we can't have a leader as eloquent, wonderful, intelligent, sexy, glorious, transformational and messianic as Obama ... and then figure out if there's some way we can blame that on Harper, too.
From there, we will go on to inform Canadians of the many fundamental policy differences between president-elect Obama and the other guy.
For example, we must explain why Harper is evil, cruel, mean, homophobic and a closet Christian bigot for having supported civil unions for homosexuals, but not gay marriages, in Canada, while Obama is enlightened, wise, metrosexual and -- excuse me, I'm tearing up a bit, here -- Christ-like, for having supported civil unions, but not gay marriages, in the U.S.
This as indicated by Obama's totally secular remarks during his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2004, when he sensitively declared: "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman." (Source, Chicago Tribune, March 25, 2007).
LACKEY OF ALBERTA OIL
Next, we must emphasize that while Harper is an unscrupulous, evil, planet-killing, lackey of the Alberta oil industry for having previously opposed efforts to fight global warming, while today hypocritically claiming to be on side, Obama is an ethical, moral, green god for having previously voted, at the urging of the Illinois coal industry as an Illinois state senator in 1998, in favour of a bill condemning the Kyoto accord and prohibiting the state from regulating greenhouse gases, while today sincerely supporting efforts to combat global warming.
Finally, let us explain to our readers and listeners why Harper is an arrogant, imperialistic, jingoistic, death-monger for supporting the war in Afghanistan, while Obama is a humble, multilateralist, peace-seeking, saint for supporting the war in Afghanistan.
Yes, fellow members of THE MOB, our mission going forward is clear.
And remember, whenever comparing the two leaders, always remind your audience about how YOU felt the night Obama was elected president of the United States.
Because, after all, that's what's really important here ... Isn't it?
Sincerely,
Lorrie ('Obama Boy') Goldstein
President, THE MOB, Canada

Only a Canadian will understand this post and probably defend it .

 

[tracy]

I disagree with his view on gay marriage, but the reality is the US clearly isn't ready for it. It was on the ballot here in California and the majority of voters voted to ban gay marriage. In CALIFORNIA!!! If they aren't ready for it, I doubt it's going to fly in other places. It's a shame though. I am really sad for the people here who got married and will probably now have those marriages voided.

 

[Avro]

Honestly I don't think Obama is going to even look our way for a little while, he has other more important issues to deal with.

However....Walt....Prentice seems eager to strike a North American climate change accord with the U.S. as Obama's and Harper's goals on Carbon reduction seem to be the same.

Huh? Carbon reduction eh, gee I guess your hero believes the earth is round as well.:lol::lol::lol:

Stick that in your pipe old man.:lol::lol::lol:

.....oh and btw Lorrie goldstien also believes in AGW.......8O:lol:

Ta ta

 

[karrie]

I disagree with his view on gay marriage, but the reality is the US clearly isn't ready for it. It was on the ballot here in California and the majority of voters voted to ban gay marriage. In CALIFORNIA!!! If they aren't ready for it, I doubt it's going to fly in other places. It's a shame though. I am really sad for the people here who got married and will probably now have those marriages voided.

That's why it needs to be taken to the level of human rights. Is it or isn't it a basic human right to be allowed to marry? If it IS a human right, then a vote can't take it away from you. Just like you can't vote slavery back in.

 

[Avro]

Canadians will struggle to be noticed in Washington

 

[Praxius]

Canadians will struggle to be noticed in Washington

Oh if we really want to get noticed, just start developing nukes.... that'll get some attention.

 

[tracy]

That's why it needs to be taken to the level of human rights. Is it or isn't it a basic human right to be allowed to marry? If it IS a human right, then a vote can't take it away from you. Just like you can't vote slavery back in.

I'm with you on that. In fact, it's almost the exact discussion I've had with friends here. Minority rights should not be voted on.

 

[darkbeaver]

I'm with you on that. In fact, it's almost the exact discussion I've had with friends here. Minority rights should not be voted on.

Interesting take on minority rights and wheather they should be voted on. If they aren't voted on, how do they get enacted? I can think of one minority that will strongly agree and that is the wealthy

 

[einmensch]

The institution of Marriage is One Man One woman. Yes gay guys have married straight women and gays girls straight guys? I object to gays being married. Call it a Union or whatever and give them the same rights -The sticker or licker may now kiss his/her bride, beard and all.

You mean like the Rebellion of 1837 in both Upper and Lower Canada?

 

[scratch]

Interesting take on minority rights and wheather they should be voted on. If they aren't voted on, how do they get enacted? I can think of one minority that will strongly agree and that is the wealthy

Hey db,

I really agree with you on the wealthy.

rgs

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Interesting take on minority rights and wheather they should be voted on. If they aren't voted on, how do they get enacted? I can think of one minority that will strongly agree and that is the wealthy

Quite right, minority rights should not be voted on by the majority. It is ridiculous to give the majority a veto over whether minority should have equal rights. Indeed, I cannot think of even one instance where a majority granted a minority more rights as a result of the referendum, it just doesn’t happen.

So how should these rights be decided? That is simple; minority rights is a constitutional issue, Supreme Court is the final arbiter on the constitution. So it is quite proper that the Courts must rule on the issue. Then the parliament also should have something to say about it, they are the representatives of the people. In addition, they are sworn to uphold the constitution, so it is quite proper that they should have a say.

However, the average citizen in under no obligation to uphold the constitution. He may want to out of respect for constitution, but he is not obliged to do so, it is not part of his job. It is the central part of the job description of Supreme Court and Parliament to uphold the constitution. So the courts and the Parliament must decide on human rights, minority rights issues.

But asking the average citizen, average majority citizen if minority should be granted equal right sis like asking Dracula if the blood banks should be closed.

 

[scratch]

What minorities are we talking about? Where are these minorities located? What rights are these minorities being denied?

rgs

 

[Colpy]

MOB now in Canada

What else could force us to love Obama, yet ridicule Harper?
By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN
Last Updated: 6th November 2008, 4:19am
Greetings, fellow journalists, and welcome to the founding meeting of the Canadian chapter of The Media of Obama. Or, as we like to call ourselves, THE MOB, Canada.

As you know, THE MOB, Canada, will be operating as a subsidiary of its American parent, The Media of Obama, USA, (THE MOB, USA) for the foreseeable future.
Our job, as a branch plant of our American head office, will be to provide Canadians with objective news analysis of the glorious presidency of Barack Obama, compared to the disappointing prime ministership of Stephen Harper.
Inspired by the "news" judgment of former Democratic party strategist Chris Matthews, president of THE MOB, USA, who, during his duties co-anchoring MSNBC's coverage of the presidential primaries declared, upon hearing a speech by Obama: "My, I felt this thrill going up my leg! I mean, I don't have that too often!", we at THE MOB, Canada, will endeavour to bring similar objective news analysis to the table whenever comparing president-elect Obama to what's-his-name.
Our first order of business will be to wonder out loud -- ad nauseam -- why we can't have a leader as eloquent, wonderful, intelligent, sexy, glorious, transformational and messianic as Obama ... and then figure out if there's some way we can blame that on Harper, too.
From there, we will go on to inform Canadians of the many fundamental policy differences between president-elect Obama and the other guy.
For example, we must explain why Harper is evil, cruel, mean, homophobic and a closet Christian bigot for having supported civil unions for homosexuals, but not gay marriages, in Canada, while Obama is enlightened, wise, metrosexual and -- excuse me, I'm tearing up a bit, here -- Christ-like, for having supported civil unions, but not gay marriages, in the U.S.
This as indicated by Obama's totally secular remarks during his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2004, when he sensitively declared: "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman." (Source, Chicago Tribune, March 25, 2007).
LACKEY OF ALBERTA OIL
Next, we must emphasize that while Harper is an unscrupulous, evil, planet-killing, lackey of the Alberta oil industry for having previously opposed efforts to fight global warming, while today hypocritically claiming to be on side, Obama is an ethical, moral, green god for having previously voted, at the urging of the Illinois coal industry as an Illinois state senator in 1998, in favour of a bill condemning the Kyoto accord and prohibiting the state from regulating greenhouse gases, while today sincerely supporting efforts to combat global warming.
Finally, let us explain to our readers and listeners why Harper is an arrogant, imperialistic, jingoistic, death-monger for supporting the war in Afghanistan, while Obama is a humble, multilateralist, peace-seeking, saint for supporting the war in Afghanistan.
Yes, fellow members of THE MOB, our mission going forward is clear.
And remember, whenever comparing the two leaders, always remind your audience about how YOU felt the night Obama was elected president of the United States.
Because, after all, that's what's really important here ... Isn't it?
Sincerely,
Lorrie ('Obama Boy') Goldstein
President, THE MOB, Canada

Great article!

 

[scratch]

But......now that he has spoken out....he is not what he portrayed himself on the campaign trail.

Just another president putting one over on the people.

 

[darkbeaver]

Hey db,

I really agree with you on the wealthy.

rgs

We have some common ground then. I hope you don't mind me suggesting a short course on labour history. A fuller history of wealth cannot be had or understood without a study of the origins of wealth and that is quite simply your and mine broken backs, dreams and spirits.

 

[scratch]

Go for it db.

rgs

 

[darkbeaver]

Obama is the long awaited anti-christ. He will unleash the dogs of war with his putrid hand and soak the soil beneath our feet with the blood of the innocent. He is the poison fruit of the tree of death. Millions will die by his smile. His words are foul.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

MOB now in Canada


For example, we must explain why Harper is evil, cruel, mean, homophobic and a closet Christian bigot for having supported civil unions for homosexuals, but not gay marriages, in Canada, while Obama is enlightened, wise, metrosexual and -- excuse me, I'm tearing up a bit, here -- Christ-like, for having supported civil unions, but not gay marriages, in the U.S.

Walter, the explanation is very simple. One is Canada, the other is USA. What is considered liberal in USA is considered conservative in Canada.

Thus in Canada, courts ruled that banning SSM contravenes the Charter. The government of the day (Chrétien) accepted this decision. At that time country was split roughly 50:50 on SSM issue (now roughly 70% Canadian supports SSM). To oppose SSM in this situation is a conservative position, no doubt arising as a result of hatred and bigotry at least on the part of some SSM opponents. In Canada, support for civil union is not enough, that is a conservative position.

USA however, is a different story. It is a conservative country, 65% of Americans oppose SSM, ban on SSM is constitutional (at least as of now). Any politician who openly supported SSM cannot get elected (he could easily get elected in Canada). In USA support of civil unions is a liberal position, not a conservative position.

In a country where a gay person could be fired from his job, thrown out of his apartment just for being gay and for no other reason, in a country where a person could be booted out of the military just for being gay, Obama, who opposes discrimination against gays and supports civil unions is indeed enlightened, wise and compassionate.

However, as I have already said before, if Obama wanted to run in Canada, he would have to run as the leader of conservative party, and I wouldn’t vote for him. However, if I were a US citizen, I would vote for him in a heartbeat.

Let me give you a simple analogy. Suppose a woman who lives in Saudi Arabia says that women should not wear a veil. That woman is undoubtedly a liberal. But if a woman in Canada says that women should not wear a veil. Would she be considered a liberal? The same thing holds for gay rights in USA and Canada.