Yes, it is ugly hubristic and just plain wrong. So, build several across the country. And the Monument to Victims of Communism while we are at it. Let the first ones be built as what are essentially Stephen Harper's tributes to himself. This will allow him to, at least temporarily, assuage the demons that torment him.
Both are ugly and reminiscent of the worst Soviet public art. Build the rest as a constant reminder to all Canadians that we get the government we deserve. And that, if we ever again allow an anti-democratic tyrant like Harper to attain office through a divided opposition, low voter turnout, compliant corporate media, and flawed voting systems, the next Supreme Leader will build similar monstrosities to themselves.Recommend this Post
Thursday, July 9, 2015
Monday, July 6, 2015
Why is Mulclair getting a free ride on his dalliance with Harper?
It doesn't matter if the reason he walked away is corroborated by senior conservatives. What matters is that he entered into discussions in the first place. A Liberal going to the NDP, fair enough. Someone who wandered to and fro between the centre to the far hard right to the left is something else. Even in 2007, a politically aware person knew exactly what Harper was all about. A man of principle hangs up as soon as he hears that it is Harper's Team on the other end of the line.
A future leader of the NDP doesn't enter into negotiations. |He shouldn't be allowed to skate away with the claim that it wasn't about a salary dispute but rather it was about environmental policy as if that was a display of principle. If Harper had called Stephen Lewis would he have entertained the idea of working with Harper?
Exactly. But just as Harper is not of the timbre of Diefenbaker, Stanfield or Clark, Mulclair is no Lewis, Broadbent or McLauglin. The heritage of the NDP is about character and principle. Mulclair is about Mulclair.
Why bother changing our current tyrant for a wannabe one?
Recommend this Post
A future leader of the NDP doesn't enter into negotiations. |He shouldn't be allowed to skate away with the claim that it wasn't about a salary dispute but rather it was about environmental policy as if that was a display of principle. If Harper had called Stephen Lewis would he have entertained the idea of working with Harper?
Exactly. But just as Harper is not of the timbre of Diefenbaker, Stanfield or Clark, Mulclair is no Lewis, Broadbent or McLauglin. The heritage of the NDP is about character and principle. Mulclair is about Mulclair.
Why bother changing our current tyrant for a wannabe one?
Recommend this Post
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)