Ummm… did I hear that right? Did she say Canadians were stupid?

Had she not been allowed to participate, Ms. May would have whined ad nauseam, and played the victim/gender card, with cries of “power to the people.”

When I first expressed a firm NO to her participation, I was primarily considering my own ears. I have found out that, like Dion, I become deaf under certain circumstances. Whenever I'm exposed to continuous cries of calamitous catastrophies about to befall our planet, if not the entire universe – nay the Milky Way – well, I have a tendency to become extremely agitated.

But … what a surprise! Mother Earth thinks Canadians are stupid? Did she really say that? Who woulda thunk it?

*sniff* no hat tip?

Ya, this needs to get around. She's gonna float like a lead balloon in that debate.

Well, what she said in that clip PROVES beyond a shadow of a doubt that she is indeed a Liberal.

My apologies, hat tip granted

Uh, no, she said “they” (as in “other politicians”) think Canadians are stupid. She didn't say “I”, she said “they”. Listen closely.

Hm, an American-born wannabe politician calling Canadians stupid…nice.

None of the videos seem to be working….

Nevermind, that seems to be a problem with all embedded videos.

May didn't have any MPs. Theoretically, any party leader (even the marxist-leninist) could run in any riding he/she chooses. What is the test for leader's courtesy?

Call in the audio forensic experts!

Elizabeth May will add nothing to the debate.She is a bit shrill and if she does not monopolize the conversation she is not happy. She is not phsically appealing, overweight by some pounds. She will find it difficult to convince any Canadain we should pay threw the nose for saving the likes of China and India.Her entrance into the debate is a total plus for the Tories. Her support of Dion is annoying some of her supporters because they supsect her attachment to the party would end quickly if the Liberals regained power. she would be looking for a cabinet post in their government. and leave the Greens without the slightest guilt.she is an opportunist

Why we should be afraid of the Libranos?

Sask Power burns 10,000,000 tonnes of coal a year. Electricity from coal represents approx. 45% of the grid production. One tonne of coal generates 2.419 tonnes of co2. Therefore Sask Power generates 24,190,000 tonnes of co2 off of its’ coal produced electricity. At $40 a tonne for the Green Shaft tax this means Sask Power is going to pay $967,600,000 almost a billion dollars in tax to the Liberal government. Forty percent of Sask Powers electricity is consumed by Sask. residents (individuals, families, and senior citizens). Based on a population of 1,000,000 people each and every Sask. resident will see their electrical bill increase by $387 a year. For a family of 4 that is $1,548 a year. The liberals say that a family of 4 earning $60,000 or less will see a tax reduction of $1,600 a year. But wait Sask Power also has Natural gas fired electrical production that accounts for 14% of their production capacity. Under the Dion Liberals this portion of Sask Powers production will see a 27% increase on their natural gas fired generators. So now if we factor that cost in that will put a family of 4 well over the $1,600 tax reduction. We have not even touched heating the homes yet or the added costs passed down from the municipalities, goods and services, Boards of Education etc.

Why have the Liberals stood down for Harper in a past election?
Some kind of shenanigans between Harper and the Liberals, eh?

CB, May is Canadian. If you asked her, she’d identify herself as a Canadian. You don’t have to be born here to be a Canadian. And she didn’t call Canadians stupid, the clip was cut and we can’t know what she was agreeing with in her prior comment that politicians think Canadians are stupid.

OK, this is kind of a useless discussion, in that Ms. May's in … but May does have a propensity for 'truthiness.'

Truthiness 1: In a Sept. 8 interview with Don Newman, May stated she knew for a fact that none of the 4 leaders would dare say that they wouldn’t participate in the debate if she were allowed to.
She then went on to say that it was the decision of the Media Consortium executives: “they rewrote the rules” and she called them “an old boys’ club.” OK, so that was Monday Sept. 8.
On Tuesday Sept. 9, CTV reported through NDP strategist Brad Lavigne that Jack Layton had threatened not to participate if Ms. May was in. Okey-dokey, but many media continued to say it was Harper.

Truthiness 2: In another interview I saw (unfortunately I don’t recall where) May pointed to this op-ed by former CBCer Tony Burman: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RT…
“Former CBC News chief: The election debate process is a sham”

May argued that PM Harper was opposed to her participation from the get-go and offered Burman’s op-ed as evidence. In it, Burman states:
“Within days of the meeting, we were privately told by the Conservative Party representative that Prime Minister Harper would not participate in the debates if the Green Party leader was there.
That was in early 2007.”

What both Burman and May neglect to mention is that it was also early in 2007 (April) that May and Dion made their pact:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTV…
“Liberal Leader Stephane Dion is dismissing any criticism within his party about a non-aggression deal struck with Green Leader Elizabeth May.
Dion has agreed not to run a Liberal candidate in May's Nova Scotia riding of Central Nova, which is currently held by Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay.
In exchange, May is endorsing Dion as the best candidate to become prime minister.
Opinion within Liberal ranks is sharply divided. …”

AND

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTV…
“ … Under the terms of the non-compete agreement, ***May has agreed not to run a candidate against Dion and will essentially endorse him as prime minister.*** …
During the news conference May touted Dion as the answer to Canada's climate change struggles, saying she has worked closely with him and has become convinced he is the best choice to lead Canada. …”
So, at that time the PM probably decided no, she shouldn't take part in the debates.

Next, in an interview with Mike Duffy on Wed. Sept. 10, she blamed it primarily on Mr. Harper as being the one most responsible for wanting to boycott the debates. She pointed to his “hard-right agenda” and “top-down autocratic style.” But she insists she wants to see “Canadian politics practiced more respectfully.”

So, Ms. May is speaking out of both sides of her mouth, She wants a more respectful discourse, yet she paints her opponents, primarily the PM, in very negative terms. And she demonstrates a certain elasticity with the truth.

Approve
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network

She said, “I think Canadians are stupid” in the video clip. So I feel I should do something smart by voting for the Conservatives to show her I'm not. All May will do is steal votes from the Liberals and NDP which will hasten the Conservative majority. Seems the electorate are more afraid of Dion and his usurious carbon tax plans than they are of a Harper majority.

Don't Conservatives have them on speed dial or something?

“What is the test for leader's courtesy?”

They are a party leader?
That could be taken advantage of, so there may need to be another test.

I'm no forensic expert, but if you listen very carefully you make out Paul Martin offering Gurmant Grewal a bribe to cross the floor.

LOL she said Canadians are stupid!!

And over at LeftDog the Green Party brain trust has threatened to sue. Here's the link. The story is also linked on Bourque Newswatch. Just another big green blunder.

http://buckdogpolitics.blogspot.com/2008/09/gre…

“Why have the Liberals stood down for Harper in a past election?”
Saskboy, I’m curious – which election are you referring to?

If you go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgary_Southwest#Election_results
you will see that the only time the Liberals didn’t field a candidate against Harper was in the byelection in June 2002 (on Mr. Manning’s resignation, January 2002). Mr. Harper at the time was running for the Canadian Alliance.

As for Ms. May: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_North_Centre#1997-2006_general_elections
In a byelection in November 2006 (on Mr. Fontana’s resignation, 20 September 2006), May was opposed by the Liberals, who won the riding. The Conservatives, NDP, Progressive Canadian, Canadian Action and an Independent also ran against her.

If the Liberals are claiming, like you seem to suggest, that Dion’s Liberals are not fielding a candidate against her because she’s the leader of the Greens, then why did they field one against her in in London-North-Center in 2006? She was already leader of the Greens by then.

Will the Green Party threaten to sue stephantaylor.ca too? LOL

Actually that graphic of the attractive woman gasping is from the Conservative Party of Canada’s own web graphics and the context there was that she was a typical Canadian woman, the ex-girlfriend of the reader of the web site, and that you could best shock and dismay her by joining the CPC. I think that probably most women would in fact be dismayed and disgusted if even an ex boyfriend joined the CPC, it being an anti-woman anti-progress reactionary frat boy organization (or even “mafia” given their flouting of both their own elections law and Elections Canada’s rules). Certainly any decent young woman of ordinary Canadian values would dump a boyfriend who joined the CPC or even renewed his lapsed membership. So she’s not gasping at the green shift, she’s gasping at the disgusting Conservative who put her on a blog. We all feel her pain.

As for the policy issue:

1. A broad based tax is fairer than a narrow one that somehow magically hits “only big polluters” or some industries (in Harper’s case, everyone BUT the oil industry would get taxed in some sneaky way instead of ihs friends). The GST is broadly based and it works well. Amazing to see supposed free-marketeers arguing in favour of more narrow economically distorting measures.

2. It’s a shift not a tax raise. Expect the Liberals to play the income tax cut angle very heavily in the last two weeks of the campaign. Harper will follow of course without any offsetting carbon tax and bankrupt the entire economy if he gets in – or break the promise. Harper has the natural advantage of being a liar, bribe artist and amoral creep.

3. Parties exist to advance policies into law, not just to advance specific peoples’ careers. Gilles Duceppe is not in the TV leaders’ debate to become Prime Minister, it is all but mathematically impossible for him to ever have the largest continent in the House, and he’s said that even if this did happen, he can’t participate in government because it’s Canada’s government and he has no business there other than to vote on things that affect Quebec. Dion voted with Harper a few times to keep him Prime Minister during the last session of Parliament. I don’t see anyone advancing the argument that because they’re not immediately-this-moment-always seeking to be PM themselves that they don’t demonstrate the proper slathering will and lust for power to be in the TV debate.

4. A House with a few Greens in it represents the actual expressed will of the Canadian people better than one that does not, even if it requires a few deals to get there. The so-called “rights” of a few whiners in a few ridings possibly “deprived” of their chance to vote for a particular party don’t count for anything compared to the million or so voters that would be shut out if the Greens got not seats. No one has a right to be represented by a particular party nor to be able to vote for a particular party – if you feel they do, join Fair Vote Canada and change the FPTP system. Until then shut up and deal, the same way that the parties will have to deal in a minority government.

This is politics. In politics, the people that won’t compromise, trade off or deal we call “fanatics”. Which these days describes only a few NDPers who backed Jack in opposing May’s entry to the debate. Make no mistake, Jack did not change his mind. He was forced to back down by the public revulsion at his hypocritical nonsense.

The other test has always been there – a new leader of a party that already has seats, who is running in a by-election. I have never heard of a case where the leader's courtesy was extended in a general election.

I think it is a question of interpretation,

It appears to me she is saying (after repeated listening):

“Politicians are afraid to mention the word tax and “THEY” think Canadians are stupid, and cannot, and I fundamentally agree with that assessment”

To my ears she is in fact agreeing with the assessment that “Politicians are afraid to mention the word tax and “THEY” think Canadians are stupid.

The tape isn't edited, but cut short, preventing us from determining proper context.

That said, the Watermelons and Ms. May have made asses of themselves for threatening to sue.

That is definately her saying that “they” (other politicians) think that canadians are stupid. It's quite obvious. But I supoose people nly hear what they want to hear…right?!

Lame of whoever posted the 'video' to edit out the rest of what was said. Lame. Be honest and post the rest so we can hear the context.

The rest is posted. Keep reading for the context. Check the TVO link and I posted the full context in my original post.

I think Saskboy needs a job or something to fill his time rather than posting comments on this blog all day.

I don’t get it. I clearly can hear her say “I think Canadians are stupid”. Where does the “they” come into it?? (Maybe my computer is too Conservative to accept any weasel statement allowing her an “out’)

“What is the test for leader's courtesy?”

Normally it's done in a by-election when a new party leader is elected and does not hold a seat in the house. Kind of odd May never mentions Liberal's ran a candidate against her in the London by-election. Wanna explain why there was no leaders courtesy there Saskboy?

Where is the TVO link? Are we expected to believe the interview conveniently ended like that?

and if the leader of the tories was born in america no one would dare raise a word about it, right?

and if the leader of the tories was born in america no one would dare raise a word about it, right?