Ezra Levant Makes Sense

[SirJosephPorter]

BTW, did you know Abraham Lincoln founded the Republican Party?????

So what is your point, Colpy? Republican Party started out as the more liberal, more tolerant party. In the civil war, it was North vs. South. It was also mainly Republicans (north) vs. Democrats (south).

After civil war, the South was fighting civil war for more than a century. That is why South kept voting Democratic. But by 60s, Republican Party had already become party of the right.

I think civil rights legislation was the last hurrah of Republican liberalism. Proportionately, more Republicans voted for the civil rights legislation than did Democrats. All the Southern Democrats voted against the legislation.

Then came Nixon’s Southern strategy. He decided to go after Southern white vote, and push away the black vote. He figured that there were more votes among whites than blacks. From 1968 on, southern whites started voting Republican in presidential election. After that it spread to Senate, House and state elections.

The southern strategy was a success, in that it brought all the Southern rednecks from Democratic Party into Republican Party. Now Republican Party is very much party of the right, there is no room for moderates in the party.

So the fact that Lincoln was a Republican means nothing today. Lincoln himself would probably be disgusted by the direction Republican Party has taken today, the way it has veered sharply to the right.

 

[Colpy]

BTW, did you know Abraham Lincoln founded the Republican Party?????

So what is your point, Colpy? Republican Party started out as the more liberal, more tolerant party. In the civil war, it was North vs. South. It was also mainly Republicans (north) vs. Democrats (south).

After civil war, the South was fighting civil war for more than a century. That is why South kept voting Democratic. But by 60s, Republican Party had already become party of the right.

I think civil rights legislation was the last hurrah of Republican liberalism. Proportionately, more Republicans voted for the civil rights legislation than did Democrats. All the Southern Democrats voted against the legislation.

Then came Nixon’s Southern strategy. He decided to go after Southern white vote, and push away the black vote. He figured that there were more votes among whites than blacks. From 1968 on, southern whites started voting Republican in presidential election. After that it spread to Senate, House and state elections.

The southern strategy was a success, in that it brought all the Southern rednecks from Democratic Party into Republican Party. Now Republican Party is very much party of the right, there is no room for moderates in the party.

So the fact that Lincoln was a Republican means nothing today. Lincoln himself would probably be disgusted by the direction Republican Party has taken today, the way it has veered sharply to the right.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Lincoln would be shocked! Oh PLEASE!!!! I'm gonna hurt myself.....Lincoln wanted to ship all the Blacks back to Africa!

No moderates in the Republican Party! Oh My!

You've never heard of Conan the Republican, governor of the largest State in the USA?

(wipes eyes)

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Lincoln would be shocked! Oh PLEASE!!!! I'm gonna hurt myself.....Lincoln wanted to ship all the Blacks back to Africa!

Maybe so, Colpy. But he wanted to free the slaves, and Southern Democrats didn’t. That is the big difference. You cannot judge Lincoln by today’s standard (well, perhaps you can, but I won’t). By the standards of his days, Lincoln was a progressive.

No moderates in the Republican Party! Oh My!

I did not say that there are no moderates in the Republican Party; I said that there is no room for moderates, big difference.

At one point, there were many moderates in the Republican Party. Indeed, President Ford was a moderate, right of center president (so was Nixon, in spite of his Southern strategy, Nixon started the EPA).

But moderates have been slowly driven out of the party for several decades now. Ford was the last centre right president; all Republican Presidents after Ford have been right wing Presidents.

Now there are very few moderates left in the party. The party is predominantly southern, predominantly conservative, predominantly white, predominantly male, predominantly old. These days Republican definition of a moderate is McCain, who is strongly prolife and had promised to appoint only prolife judges to Supreme Court to get rid of Roe vs. Wade.

So I stand by what I said, there is no room for moderates in the Republican Party any more, it is predominantly a right wing party. Moderates like Arnold Schwarzenegger are a disappearing breed.

 

[Colpy]

Lincoln would be shocked! Oh PLEASE!!!! I'm gonna hurt myself.....Lincoln wanted to ship all the Blacks back to Africa!

Maybe so, Colpy. But he wanted to free the slaves, and Southern Democrats didn’t. That is the big difference. You cannot judge Lincoln by today’s standard (well, perhaps you can, but I won’t). By the standards of his days, Lincoln was a progressive.

No moderates in the Republican Party! Oh My!

I did not say that there are no moderates in the Republican Party; I said that there is no room for moderates, big difference.

At one point, there were many moderates in the Republican Party. Indeed, President Ford was a moderate, right of center president (so was Nixon, in spite of his Southern strategy, Nixon started the EPA).

But moderates have been slowly driven out of the party for several decades now. Ford was the last centre right president; all Republican Presidents after Ford have been right wing Presidents.

Now there are very few moderates left in the party. The party is predominantly southern, predominantly conservative, predominantly white, predominantly male, predominantly old. These days Republican definition of a moderate is McCain, who is strongly prolife and had promised to appoint only prolife judges to Supreme Court to get rid of Roe vs. Wade.

So I stand by what I said, there is no room for moderates in the Republican Party any more, it is predominantly a right wing party. Moderates like Arnold Schwarzenegger are a disappearing breed.

First of all, you were the one that dragged Lincoln into a very modern light with your comment that he "would probably be disgusted by the direction the Republican Party has taken today".

Secondly, if there is no room for moderates in the Republican Party, perhaps you would like to explain how Conan the Republican, whom you admit IS a moderate, was elected governor of the most populous state, and is an important figure in the GOP.

Thirdly, perhaps it is time you came to the realization that there is a miniscule possibility that someone out there that doesn't possess a Liberal Party of Canada membership card (or reasonable facsimile) actually has something important to say.

:roll:

 

[SirJosephPorter]

First of all, you were the one that dragged Lincoln into a very modern light with your comment that he "would probably be disgusted by the direction the Republican Party has taken today".

Sure, Colpy, I assume if Lincoln had been alive today he would be a progressive by today’s standards. So yes, he will be disgusted by the right (or far right) turn of the Republican Party.

Secondly, if there is no room for moderates in the Republican Party, perhaps you would like to explain how Conan the Republican, whom you admit IS a moderate, was elected governor of the most populous state, and is an important figure in the GOP.

There is nothing mysterious about it; I have already said that moderates in Republican Party are a vanishing breed. That doesn’t mean there are no moderates left, there still are a few, but they are on their way out. At the rate it is going, there may not be any moderates left in the Republican Party (if that happens, Republicans may be in permanent opposition, like Reform or Alliance parties, until it decides to become more inclusive and lets in moderates again).

So Conan the Republican is an exception, not the rule in the Republican Party. But he works well with the Democratic Congress in California and many Republicans don’t like it.

Thirdly, perhaps it is time you came to the realization that there is a miniscule possibility that someone out there that doesn't possess a Liberal Party of Canada membership card (or reasonable facsimile) actually has something important to say.

I do not possess membership card of the Liberal party, and I don’t think I ever will. I support liberal principles (tolerance, diversity, environmentalism, multiculturalism, the Charter etc.). I support Liberal Party only to the extent that it supports these principles (Conservative Party supports very few of these principles).

 

[Colpy]

First of all, you were the one that dragged Lincoln into a very modern light with your comment that he "would probably be disgusted by the direction the Republican Party has taken today".

Sure, Colpy, I assume if Lincoln had been alive today he would be a progressive by today’s standards. So yes, he will be disgusted by the right (or far right) turn of the Republican Party.

Secondly, if there is no room for moderates in the Republican Party, perhaps you would like to explain how Conan the Republican, whom you admit IS a moderate, was elected governor of the most populous state, and is an important figure in the GOP.

There is nothing mysterious about it; I have already said that moderates in Republican Party are a vanishing breed. That doesn’t mean there are no moderates left, there still are a few, but they are on their way out. At the rate it is going, there may not be any moderates left in the Republican Party (if that happens, Republicans may be in permanent opposition, like Reform or Alliance parties, until it decides to become more inclusive and lets in moderates again).

So Conan the Republican is an exception, not the rule in the Republican Party. But he works well with the Democratic Congress in California and many Republicans don’t like it.

Thirdly, perhaps it is time you came to the realization that there is a miniscule possibility that someone out there that doesn't possess a Liberal Party of Canada membership card (or reasonable facsimile) actually has something important to say.

I do not possess membership card of the Liberal party, and I don’t think I ever will. I support liberal principles (tolerance, diversity, environmentalism, multiculturalism, the Charter etc.). I support liberal Party only to the extent that it supports these principles (Conservative Party supports very few of these principles).

You ASSUME. Well, your assumption is ridiculous.

Almost as ridiculous as your pronouncements on Republican moderates.........the GOP is a long, long way from dead. All Obama and the Democratic Congress needs do to bring them back roaring is what Mexico wants and re-introduce the Assault Weapons Ban.....just ask Bill Clinton. Suddenly the Democratic Congress will be Republican.........

Then its on to the Conservative Party....Sir Porter, you couldn't tell the difference between a Nazi and a Nanny........(shakes head).......:lol:

Let's see, arrogance, self-righteousness, an inability to recognize the worth of other ideas, a feeling of philosophical entitlement to the reins of power, and a tendency to lie viciously about the opposing philosophy..........well, you might not have a card, but you certainly are a "reasonable facsimile" of a Liberal.

 

[YukonJack]

Response to #34 And #38.

If you had even the least degree of honest integrity, you would not have issued those posts, filled with lies, bluffs and innuendoes because, if you had been honest, you would have known that they were filled with lies, bluffs and innuendoes.

Goodbye, o noble one, I am thru with you. My own self worth is more important that some petty victory over an opponent, which you cherish so much that you do not hesitate to lie, bluff and prevericate to create the impression that you are better than anyone else.

Remember the Christian Andersen story about the emperor with no clothes?

How does it feel to be totally naked?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Is there any point to this post, Yukon Jack?

 

[Cannuck]

Is there any point to this post, Yukon Jack?

I'm pretty sure he's saying you're a liar. I wouldn't go that far. I actually think you believe the nonense you post.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Time to get to HRCs discussions I think. Or make a new thread please.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Almost as ridiculous as your pronouncements on Republican moderates.........the GOP is a long, long way from dead.

Colpy, I did not say that GOP is dying, what is I said was that there are very few moderates left. If GOP continues to push out the moderates, it will become another Reform Party or Alliance Party, and will be the perpetual opposition.

Then if Democrats are doing a good job, GOP will do terribly in elections, or if Democrats are doing a terrible job, GOP will do less well than expected.

Thus, the average gain for the out of power party in first midterm is around 25 House seats and 3 or 4 Senate seats. GOP should make these gains in 2010 even if Obama is doing a good job and economy recovers.

However, if GOP has pushed out moderates it may make very few gains in 2010 (if Obama does well) and may make only modest gains in Obama screws up.

Then its on to the Conservative Party....Sir Porter, you couldn't tell the difference between a Nazi and a Nanny

Huh?

Let's see, arrogance, self-righteousness, an inability to recognize the worth of other ideas, a feeling of philosophical entitlement to the reins of power, and a tendency to lie viciously about the opposing philosophy..........well, you might not have a card, but you certainly are a "reasonable facsimile" of a Liberal.

Well now, that is only your opinion, isn't it?

 

[DaSleeper]

Time to get to HRCs discussions I think. Or make a new thread please.

Naah!!! That wouldn't bode well with somebody's pet topic....:smile:

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

I saw an ad in The Globe and Mail newspaper for Ezra Levant's book. It must be selling well. He is doing a lot of book signings.

Levant said HRCs started as a noble cause, but has degenerated into an industry. It is time to scale the zealots way back.

 

[CDNBear]

Well now, that is only your opinion, isn't it?

I thnk not. Seems to be the opinion of quite a few.

If one person has a problem with you, it is liklely their problem. If many people have a problem with you, it is you, that has the problem...;-)

I saw an ad in The Globe and Mail newspaper for Ezra Levant's book. It must be selling well. He is doing a lot of book signings.

Levant said HRCs started as a noble cause, but has degenerated into an industry. It is time to scale the zealots way back.

A self securing industry at that. Nothing like getting a mandate to protect your own job at others expense eh...

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I saw an ad in The Globe and Mail newspaper for Ezra Levant's book. It must be selling well. He is doing a lot of book signings.

Levant said HRCs started as a noble cause, but has degenerated into an industry. It is time to scale the zealots way back.

His book maybe doing well, I don’t know. But that doesn’t mean it is any good, it may be mostly the Reform and Alliance supporters which may be buying it (there are millions of them in Canada).

Thus, Ann Coulter’s books often become best sellers. That doesn’t mean they re any good, they are total rubbish (at least in my opinion). It is just that the far right base of the Republican Party simply laps up anything and everything she says.

Indeed, in USA many of the books by far right authors become best sellers, the Republican Party base buys them and laps them up unquestioningly. Thus, Bill Bennett’s Book of Virtues was a best seller (even though it was revealed that Bennett has a serious gambling problem, he visits Las Vegas periodically and loses thousands of dollars of his own money gambling).

 

[CDNBear]

His book maybe doing well, I don’t know. But that doesn’t mean it is any good, it may be mostly the Reform and Alliance supporters which may be buying it (there are millions of them in Canada).

Or just people that are objective and seek to be informed.

Thus, Ann Coulter’s books often become best sellers. That doesn’t mean they re any good, they are total rubbish (at least in my opinion). It is just that the far right base of the Republican Party simply laps up anything and everything she says.

Again, one can not claim to be informed, if they chose to willfully blind themselves to the extremists. Kind of like why some people read your posts...;-)

Indeed, in USA many of the books by far right authors become best sellers, the Republican Party base buys them and laps them up unquestioningly. Thus, Bill Bennett’s Book of Virtues was a best seller (even though it was revealed that Bennett has a serious gambling problem, he visits Las Vegas periodically and loses thousands of dollars of his own money gambling).

See...you don't have a lock on moral bankruptcy, and here you thought you were an original. You extremists are all alike...

 

[Colpy]

SirJosephPorter;
His book maybe doing well, I don’t know. But that doesn’t mean it is any good, it may be mostly the Reform and Alliance supporters which may be buying it (there are millions of them in Canada).

Well, I could probably agree with that; after all, it sure ain't the left wing that gives a damn about our basic individual rights........:roll:

Thus, Ann Coulter’s books often become best sellers. That doesn’t mean they re any good, they are total rubbish (at least in my opinion). It is just that the far right base of the Republican Party simply laps up anything and everything she says.

Coulter is a practised looney that knows how to get attention and sell books. she is often beyond the Pale with her public statements......she also often says things that need to be said.

Ezra Levant is a screaming Pinko compared to Coulter.........

Indeed, in USA many of the books by far right authors become best sellers, the Republican Party base buys them and laps them up unquestioningly. Thus, Bill Bennett’s Book of Virtues was a best seller (even though it was revealed that Bennett has a serious gambling problem, he visits Las Vegas periodically and loses thousands of dollars of his own money gambling).

As you've been told over and over and over and over.....if you believe and support democracy, rule of law, and individual rights you are NOT an extremeist. Your idiotic smears of everyone that disagrees with you are becoming tedious.

When you scream "extremeist" at those who are merely on the right side of the mainstream, you reveal a mindset more like Anne Coulter than Ezra Levant........closed, radical, chauvanistic and dangerously exclusive........

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Well, reading books is a good thing. Things become news in different ways. So much of the media in Canada just wishes to be good fellows. Don't rock the boat, be nice to all, just be cool. Live and let live to HRC bullies? Not me.

A bad plan to stop separatists, a little firmness here could have kept the BQ out of Ottawa. Or a few decades earlier Eaton's could have told the Quebec Language police to jump in a lake in regard to their language laws and not remove their apostraphe and S. Political cowardice is a bad thing.

Yet the federal Elections Canada commission had no trouble squashing the Rhino party and other minor parties out of meaningful existence. Now Rhino party candidates have to run as independents as they can no longer run as a federal party because Elections Canada will not register them. Gov'ts can be bullies so they need watchdogs.
Rhinoceros Party of Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Thus, Ann Coulter’s books often become best sellers. That doesn’t mean they re any good, they are total rubbish (at least in my opinion). It is just that the far right base of the Republican Party simply laps up anything and everything she says.

Coulter is a practised looney that knows how to get attention and sell books. she is often beyond the Pale with her public statements......she also often says things that need to be said.

Colpy, so I assume you agree with me, just because a book is on the best seller list, doesn’t necessarily mean that it is any good.

As you've been told over and over and over and over.....if you believe and support democracy, rule of law, and individual rights you are NOT an extremeist.

Perhaps not according to your definition. By my definition, one may support democracy and still be an extremist. Thus, somebody who wants to ban abortion, restrict contraception, want to make teaching of Book of Genesis mandatory in public schools, along with (or in place of) evolution, wants to bring back school prayers (And make them mandatory), somebody who want so ban embryonic stem cell research etc. does not support any treasonous activity, he may want to do these things legally.

In your opinion he may not be an extremist, sin my opinion, he is.

 

[CDNBear]

Colpy, so I assume you agree with me, just because a book is on the best seller list, doesn’t necessarily mean that it is any good.

It may not be any good, and with Coulter, that's almost a guarantee, but willfully blinding yourself to what the fringe has to say, is just stupid.

Perhaps not according to your definition. By my definition, one may support democracy and still be an extremist. Thus, somebody who wants to ban abortion, restrict contraception, want to make teaching of Book of Genesis mandatory in public schools, along with (or in place of) evolution, wants to bring back school prayers (And make them mandatory), somebody who want so ban embryonic stem cell research etc. does not support any treasonous activity, he may want to do these things legally.

No, that's pretty much an extremist. Because for the most part, those ideologies would be placing a religious doctrine back in Gov't. That's counterproductive to democracy.