If she favoured reducing Quebec's seat ratio, so all MPs have the same number of voters, coast to coast, I would let her stay. That is a staunch federalist position. Many Quebecers joined the BQ because it was socially progressive and pro-union. This doesn't look good on her or the NDP, but she won't be the long term leader.
Nycole Turmel’s flirtation with sovereignty was not a secret.
- Thread starter Retired_Can_Soldier
- Start date
Lolita and Jackie Jizzcock? Your words not mine MF Find a post where I said something about that.
It would be if politicians from all parties had the balls, but they don't.
Your kidding right. Check the link of this editorial. It comes from none other than the Toronto Star which I assure you is not the periodical of right wing hackery. Secondly, what does my military service have to do with anything. I have had nothing but well wishes for Jack Layton and his battle with cancer and after some of the mud he tried to sling at the military I'd say that I was pretty considerate. Heck I even said that I was happy he won official opposition status, so whatever Cliffy/ Give me a break.
That doesn't give the piece any more credibility for denouncing the party from a second term as official opposition. Especially considering she's a self proclaimed federalist, and an interim leader.
Usually the fear-mongering doesn't begin until a few months before the next election. The media is having its usual feast for headlines and this will all be mountains out of molehills in a couple of months.
Last edited:
She says she's a federalist. What does she mean by that. She has to stridently support some federalist proposals that Quebec separatists don't like. I have heard none from her. How about saying Quebec hockey teams should always play under Canada, and not Quebec. Just something to peeve them off. She won't, she looks like a grade one schoolteacher, as bland as can be.
Jack Layton's NDP is sworn to "protect" Quebec in the case of an expected seat redistribution.............
The NDP IS the new BQ.
Sure it does, because folks such as yourself can't claim that it is fabricated by Fox News North or some Right Wing Blogger, but no matter the source of the editorial the fact of the matter is that she was indeed a card carrying member of the bloc and still has ties. She needs to disassociate herself completely or will hurt her party in the next election (leader or Not).
Hackery is when stuff is made up. This is a matter of record and as I said was brought forward by the Toronto Star, not the Sun, not the Globe and Mail, not Sun TV, not CTS.
If this were a skeleton in Harpers closet you guys on the left would be slipping in the puddles of your own drool.:lol:
This does not fair well for the NDP (even in the short term) and the best thing Nycole Turmel could do for her party right now is step aside.
Nope, you've got me mixed up with the END OF THE WORLD IS COMING because Harper has a majority gang. They are down the hall on the LEFT.
Why? Because Con finger pointers say so? I have a Conservative Party membership - paid for by a friend so I could go vote for his candidacy. Am I Conservative? I went for the party....
Fear-mongering???
By WHOM??? The Toronto STAR?????
Oh, a Federalist is she? Uh-huh.........as late as TUESDAY still a member of Quebec Solidaire, which on its website lists as Commitment 23:
Oh, and one of the three founding entities???
The Communist Party of Quebec.
Goooood.
Our history | Québec solidaire
I really don't give a damn if Harper has his majority. What's changed? Cons are still doing their deflective finger-pointing, schoolyard name-calling and petty bickering - just like their control freak manipulator
Just to play devil's advocate here: how consistent are you on sovereignty?
I myself am a world federalist, so am not particularly sovereigntist. Sure I believe in decentralization with power shared eqaully even with local, national and world governments, and so on that front do support moderate sovereignty, but certainly not absolute sovereignty. So I can say that I am consistent on the questions of both Canadian and Quebec sovereignty. It would just be a question of whether Quebec and Canada would each have their own national governments, or whether a united Canada would have one national government within this larger world federation, and so as a result, I'm quite indifferent to Quebec sovereignty since I see it more as just an administrative issue, kind of like determining provincial boundaries or municipal boundaries.
On the other hand, my question to those who are Canadian sovereigntists who oppose Quebec sovereignty, is: how do you reconsile two contradictory philosophies (i.e. federalist at the Quebec level but sovereigntist or "separatist" at the federal level by opposing NAU etc.)?
I myself am a world federalist, so am not particularly sovereigntist. Sure I believe in decentralization with power shared eqaully even with local, national and world governments, and so on that front do support moderate sovereignty, but certainly not absolute sovereignty. So I can say that I am consistent on the questions of both Canadian and Quebec sovereignty. It would just be a question of whether Quebec and Canada would each have their own national governments, or whether a united Canada would have one national government within this larger world federation, and so as a result, I'm quite indifferent to Quebec sovereignty since I see it more as just an administrative issue, kind of like determining provincial boundaries or municipal boundaries.
On the other hand, my question to those who are Canadian sovereigntists who oppose Quebec sovereignty, is: how do you reconsile two contradictory philosophies (i.e. federalist at the Quebec level but sovereigntist or "separatist" at the federal level by opposing NAU etc.)?
Ahhh....this story was revealed in the Liberal rag, the Toronto Star.
Harper has literally avoided speaking on it, simply saying he thought the Leader of Her Majesty's (supposedly) Loyal Opposition should be, in his opinion, dedicated to Canada. That's it, and then only when coaxed.
You are really barking up the wrong tree here, Wolfie.
You're tonguing on it aren't you? I said Cons. In which context did I use "Harper"?
Manipulate much?
Fine.
Yep, we're enjoying ourselves......watching the NDP exposed as the collection of Quebec nationalists, Israel haters, radical unionists, conspiracy theorists, and simple morons is a complete joy. And, BTW, that is just at the very top of the party!!!!
No manipulation necessary, they do it to themselves.......which was my point.
Yep, nice to see them exposed.
God help us if they ever form government!!!!
Which is why their exposure is so sweet, and so necessary.
The Liberals will be back.