WE'RE IN - EVERYBODY WINS!
If you haven't heard the news, WE'RE IN!!! (The debates, that is).
Layton caved, then Harper. No word from the Consortium yet, but what else can they do?
Latest:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2008/09/10/elxn-may-debates.htm...
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080907/election200...
This not a win for the Green Party - it's a win for the voters, for democracy, for the basic Canadian value of fairness. *
In fact, now all those NDP & Conservative voters that switched to us in protest will be going back. No problem, we just have to win them over with Elizabeth's persuasive debate performance.
* Okay, it is a win for us, and all of our candidates. GO GREENS!
Erich Jacoby-Hawkins
Barrie, ON
The views I express on this blog are purely my own and should not be construed to represent the official position of the Green Party of Canada - the same goes for all other people's posts & comments.
- Go to blog
- Login to post comments
THANK YOU thank you thank you
For all the efforts of people across the country.
Greens thank you for helping to restore democracy - we've got a lot more work to do.
But it's the issue Elizabeth May brought into the election when she launched on Sunday. And now everyone will hear our message.
Darcy Higgins
debates
I sent an email to both the PM and to the NDP leader informing them that , in the case of the NDP, many people where saying they would vote green just to restore democracy. In the case of the PM I showed that his actions where being seen as weak and his own people where saying he is a fraid to face our leaderin debates. I got replies back from both of them. The NDP actually read my email and replied to it. The PM's office did not reply other than to thank me for sending him an email. I basically thanked him for putting so much focus on our leader thus proving to Canada that she is a major threat. I doubt my email was really read,just basically put in a pile of the negative emails he must get all the time. I am sure I am just a bit of data in his office.
I don't know if I had any effect(other than being one of thousands of emails piling in),but it felt like the right thing to do.
yours;
Michael J. Kaer
Strong Leader
Check out the "Strong leadership" from Harper:
"Conservative spokesman Kory Teneycke said the Tories are dropping their opposition to Ms. May participating in the debate, saying they don't want to be the odd man out on the matter.
“It appears the NDP has changed their position. Our position has been to support the NDP on this point of principle. We are not going to be the only ones to boycott the debate,” Mr. Teneycke said."
--
My blog is www.abandonedstuff.com
A Question of Support
Hmmm...so Harper was supporting the NDP's "point in principle"...I didn't think "Real" political parties in the Harper-Layton space-time continuum supported one another on anything, for fear they would merge into one big shapeless mass....maybe Harper will now throw his support completely behind Jack Layton before the election is over!
"Sudbury" Steve May
Jack's own merger admission
Not only were Layton & Harper on the verge of merging on this issue (same talking points, each crediting the other with the lead on this), but Jack also accepts the accusation that the Bloc and the NDP are the same:
http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&new...
Having agreed that the NDP and Bloc were indistinguishable, clearly he'd have to accept that only Jack or Gilles could take part in the debate, right? So perhaps that's when the contradictions in his convuluted logic finally snapped something in his brain and he came to his senses.
Erich Jacoby-Hawkins
Barrie, ON
The views I express on this blog are purely my own and should not be construed to represent the official position of the Green Party of Canada - the same goes for all other people's posts & comments.
Great.
Let's hope that Ms. May debates the issues and not dwell on the fact that the Greens were not initially allowed to participate. :)
the fact is the hatred and
the fact is the hatred and anger that harper and layton showed toward our leader, it shows that they are not the type of leaders we want.
They take our platform and water it down and call it their own... Thats a sign of WEAK leadership and weak ideas.
Everyone has started to jump on board with their ideas of green policies.. which are weak and watered down.
we need strong change, and carbon taxes are not going to do it..
Its going to take changing peoples thinking on green policies.
The Gender Card
I've been voting Green for the last three elections and I finally got off my duff to send in a donation after the broadcasters' consortium decided to shut the Greens out of the debate.
The fact that the decision was reversed should make me happy, but I'm actually not very happy about how May approached the initial ruling, at least after I read:
"This is anti-democratic, closed-door decision making . . . to keep out the one woman of a political party," said May.
and the use of the term "old-boys club".
Playing the gender card here earns my contempt, and makes me disillusioned with a party I have voted for because I thought they were bringing a new perspective to the political arena.
Please, unless something overtly sexist is said, can the Green Party keep allegations of sexism out of these matters in the future?
evidence
There's no way for us to tell if sexism did or didn't play a role in Layton's, Harper's, and the Consortium's choice to block May. Perhaps, if we don't have evidence it isn't fair to bring it up, yet it could well be among the reasons.
--
My blog is www.abandonedstuff.com
It could be among the
It could be among the reasons, sure.
But there's no evidence that green aliens from Mars weren't behind the consortium's decision, and that could be one of the reasons, too.
However, if May were to give that as a reason at a press conference, she would be rightly questioned about her grip on reality.
I'm not sure about everyone else, but not once during this entire issue did I get even the smallest inkling that it had anything to do with gender.
Gender is not a 'card'.
Sorry, Thomas.
I cannot deny you your experience but just because you didn't see the sexism doesn't mean it wasn't there. As a woman in politics, I am probably slightly more aware of the issue than you are. I metaphorically looked around the room to see who was opposing Elizabeth. Hmmmm...Lessee... Three party leaders. All men. Five consortium members. All men.
Perhaps there was no conspiracy based on gender, but I have to call a duck a duck and I personally saw seven men against one woman. And so did alot of other women and men.
In a world where there are more women than men, fairness has at least one female face in the room.
Trey Capnerhurst
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Trey-Capnerhurst/17608942366
Apprenticed Natural Health practitioner and Herbalist
Edmonton Decore Provincial Candidate
Past and Current federal Edmonton East candidate
I'm sorry, but this doesn't
I'm sorry, but this doesn't pass the smell test to me. I just don't like the use of emotional language like "I saw seven men against one woman". I think you're interpreting sexism because you are looking for it. Nothing overtly sexist was ever said. May's gender was never a debating point. If you claim "men" are against "women", in this sense it does nothing but take us backwards.
We could debate at length on this last statement of yours alone: "In a world where there are more women than men, fairness has at least one female face in the room." Who determines what is fair? If there is a quota for which people can become political party leaders, who decides that quota? Does that mean an equal percentage of every race, gender, religion and creed is precisely measured? Should not, instead, we just demand that all the "faces in the room" are those of the leaders of the parties -- regardless on who they are?
Sexism there is
Thomas,
Trey is completely right.
4 political leaders that are men. Consortium members that are all men. The news anchor that handle the political shows (Mike Duffy, Don Newman, etc.) are all men.
Take it from a guy if you need to. Looking at who calls the shots (and talks about them), there was structural sexism in the decision to exclude May. Doesn't matter what was said or what wasn't.
----
Julien Lamarche, Ottawa-Vanier Greens
E-mail and Google Talk: Julien Lamarche
Y! chat: drjlamarche
Assuming that there is
Assuming that there is sexism involved just because there are men involved in the decision, is sexist in itself. I refuse to throw my gender (and by extension, myself) under a bus for no good reason.
Don't think we can stop voicing our support of this!
I've been lurking, and the comments on the news articles about this are showing a much higher percentage of negative comments than they were yesterday! It's possible that Harperites and company are doing their best to flood the comments sections with negativity. We have to continue to show our positive support for May's inclusion, as a lot of people are reading the comments.
Alina Abbott
Candidate nominee
Chatham-Kent-Essex
electoral reform
We may have Layton beat on the issue of electoral reform now, but we have more than 30 days left to beat the other leaders in the campaign, steal the headlines, and energize the electorate. We were handed a gift by Layton and Harper, and the media consortium's unfair treatment of the Greens, but you're right, we can't let up now. Victory comes on Oct. 14, not today.
--
My blog is www.abandonedstuff.com
We Need to get the platform out there!!!
I figure by being in the debates this is going to raise our points all across the country. This is going to give Canadians a real choice of where they will send their votes.
NOW in the mean time Elizabeth NEEDS to get our platform out there.. she needs to bring out policy statements as if they were new to our policy, even though they are part of our platform...
She needs to target groups of disadvantaged Canadians, like First Nations, and tap into their beliefs of mother earth, and that we are the only party that TRULY cares about the Environment.
We need to move forward with empty spaces in the other parties platforms and find the groups of people that the other parties are ignoring.
I agree
Again, I've been lurking in on-line news comments, and a lot of people are questioning the apparant absence of something entitled "2008 Platform" on the Green Party website. WE all know to look at Vision Green, but this is not clear to the curious public who want to know what policies Harper and Layton were trying so hard to keep out of the debates.
Alina Abbott
Candidate nominee
Chatham-Kent-Essex