July 18, 2009 · 1:06 pm
↓ Jump to Comments

Socialists for Harper!

Harper: The Great Helmsman

Hey, it only seems fair, don’t you think?

32 Comments

Filed under Stephen Harper

Tagged as

32 Responses to Socialists for Harper!

  1. sapphireandsteel
    July 18, 2009 at 2:05 pm

    Is that Comrade Harper showing the tar sands to its new Chinese owners?

  2. philosoraptor
    July 18, 2009 at 2:14 pm

    Red

    Not sure if you watch The Young Turks at all, but I happened across these two videos discussing Pat Buchanen. If you haven’t seen these clips, you should take 15 minutes and watch the two…not necessarily for the Young Turks dialogue (although I think Uygur hits the main points), but mainly to hear Buchanen bury himself.

    Clip 1
    Clip 2

    Then, when you’re done there, check out Raphael Alexander’s recent pseudo-defense of Buchanen. If you can stomach it.

  3. philosoraptor
    July 18, 2009 at 2:17 pm

    Hey I noticed that you have plastic.com and TnT in your fave links. A very long time ago I had accounts there (as in, up to 8 years ago), but I haven’t been back in a while. Just curious if you had an account too.

  4. redtory
    July 18, 2009 at 3:22 pm

    I did once, but it’s been a long time… Many of those links were made several years ago. I couldn’t possibly keep up with all of them. Plus, there’s new stuff all the time that I keep running across.

    Must update that one of these days…

    Thanks for the links to the Pat Buchanan thing. I watched him on a couple of other programs on MSNBC angrily flailing away with his “poor white male victim” reverse-discrimination routine. Boo-hoo-hoo.

  5. Ti-Guy
    July 18, 2009 at 3:42 pm

    Hey I noticed that you have plastic.com and TnT in your fave links. A very long time ago I had accounts there (as in, up to 8 years ago)

    Plastic.com was my first (and last) foray into social media (discounting the one day I spent on UseNet in 1994 when I got accused of bestiality during a heated discussion on the aesthetics of furniture placement).

    I enjoyed it for about a couple of weeks in 2003, but then got “downmoded” by 1,213 Americans for suggesting that the Bush administration was deceptive.

    I didn’t stop crying until someone gave me a copy of Ortega y Gasset’s The Revolt of the Masses. ;)

  6. Tomm
    July 18, 2009 at 8:29 pm

    Just one big lovefest.

    Republican’s for Ignatieff, Socialists for Harper, Canadian’s for the BQ. I’m waiting for Libertarian’s to come out for Layton…

  7. greenjenny
    July 18, 2009 at 9:18 pm

    No, seriously – who’s up for buying the domain? socialistsforharper.com is available.

    Oh, and Ti-Guy: ROTFLMAO!!!

  8. Tomm
    July 18, 2009 at 9:25 pm

    greenjenny,

    Only if it’s serious.

  9. Tomm
    July 18, 2009 at 10:06 pm

    Quotes from The Little Blue Book?

    “If we fail to crush the imperialist Persian dogs, we are not heroes!”

    “Kim Jong Il is a garlic eater”

    “a theater of displacement, in which political energies that might otherwise have been expended in defending multiethnic society at home were directed instead at defending mythic multiculturalism far away. Bosnia became the latest bel espoir of a generation that had tried ecology, socialism, and civil rights only to watch all these lose their romantic momentum.”

    Oh sorry, that one was Ignatieff.

  10. Aeneas the Younger
    July 18, 2009 at 10:33 pm

    Do you really need Sir Francis and I too weasel out of the woods and tell you: “I told you so …” !

    LOL

  11. Brian Dell
    July 18, 2009 at 10:51 pm

    I’ve finally had it with the Harperites. After campaigning for these guys election after election I just can’t do it anymore.

  12. Coffee
    July 19, 2009 at 8:07 am

    Sadly, Mr. Harper is a master of the works of Stalin. In his world. its all about propaganda and the power of the supreme comrade. Black is white and white is black, and the leader rules.

    So, is it really a suprise to you guys that The Internet-propaganda-channel-of-the-CPoC party says republicans are for liberals. Black is white after all.

    Cheers,

  13. Ti-Guy
    July 19, 2009 at 9:05 am

    Tomm:
    Here’s more context to what Ignatieff was talking about:

    When policy [in the Balkans] was driven by moral motives, it was often driven by narcissism. We intervened not only to save others, but to save ourselves, or rather an image of ourselves as defenders of universal decencies. We wanted to show that the West “meant” something. This imaginary West, this narcissistic image of ourselves, we believed was incarnated in the myth of a multiethnic, multiconfessional Bosnia.

    You to be implying that providing criticism of liberalism is somehow a rejection of it. Unfortunately, that’s just a reflection of how right wingers think.

    The criticism I have of Ignatieff is that his over-weening ambitiousness and self-regard caused him to “get in front’; to be among the first to pontificate on “how the World changed on September 11th, 2001″ and come to conclusions that were premature. But then, everyone (including Herr Harper) did that and I’m sure many are living to regret it.

  14. Tomm
    July 19, 2009 at 7:36 pm

    Ti-Guy,

    Thanks for the context, it actually did help me understand what in the world Ignatieff was trying to say. And it actually made sense. Maybe I’m smarter than I think.

    Nah, Ignatieff just needs a personal translator.

    How do you defend people that see Harper as “a master of the works of Stalin”?

    Put Harper in Mao’s body and the “haters” crawl out of the woodwork just to throw their feces around hoping it will stick.

    I’ve laid off negative stereotyping of Librano’s, Cretin, Lieberals, etc. just for the purpose of maintaining credibility.

    People should realize that terms like neo-con, Harpo, Harpercrit, Stevie, etc. immedately impress on somebody else that they are only there to dump negatives and not interested in debating ideas, concepts, or options.

  15. Coffee
    July 19, 2009 at 8:20 pm

    How do you defend people that see Harper as “a master of the works of Stalin”?

    … because it is a well documented fact verified and put in print by the National Post, the CBC, and atested to by CPoC staffers.

  16. Tomm
    July 19, 2009 at 8:42 pm

    Coffee,

    You are supping your Kool Aid a little too loudly.

    Does he also eat kitten’s?

  17. Coffee
    July 19, 2009 at 9:03 pm

    “Does he also eat kitten’s?”

    dunno about that.

  18. Tomm
    July 19, 2009 at 9:22 pm

    I’ve read several books about the US War in Indochina, does that make me a Kissinger worshipper? …Or does it make me someone interested in how people are manipulated by the media and their leaders?

    I read a couple books about Hitler, including Mein Kampf. What does THAT mean?

    I guess I can deep six my political aspirations.

  19. Coffee
    July 20, 2009 at 4:15 am

    He is your man, defend him all you want. It’s his staff that complained about his affection for Stalin’s tactics

  20. sapphireandsteel
    July 20, 2009 at 4:27 am

    “I’ve laid off negative stereotyping of Librano’s, Cretin, Lieberals, etc. just for the purpose of maintaining credibility. ”

    Ha ha ha yeah right. None of those Kool Aid comments count right? Oh man that made me laugh.

  21. sapphireandsteel
    July 20, 2009 at 4:29 am

    “I guess I can deep six my political aspirations.”

    Actually no you don’t Tomm. Just don’t let that idiot Vic Toews read what you’ve read. He doesn’t care about context when he comes up with his half baked theories.

  22. Ti-Guy
    July 20, 2009 at 5:10 am

    People should realize that terms like neo-con, Harpo, Harpercrit, Stevie, etc. immedately impress on somebody else that they are only there to dump negatives and not interested in debating ideas, concepts, or options.

    I believe the absence of epithets does not imply that ideas, concepts or options are going to be “debated.”

  23. Coffee
    July 20, 2009 at 5:20 am

    For the record, it was senior CPoC officials that complained about Mr. Harper’s affection for Stalin’s tactics and mastery of his works – discussed openly on the CBC and reported in the National Post. The epithets in this case come from the CPoC.

  24. sapphireandsteel
    July 20, 2009 at 5:43 am

    Stevie is a term? Is it a unit of measurements to measure bullshit?

  25. Tomm
    July 20, 2009 at 8:29 pm

    Wow!

    Thanks to all of you for keeping me in line.

    I am humbled. But not to humbled to accept your nomination as troll of the week.

    Sadly, I was in earnest.

  26. sapphireandsteel
    July 21, 2009 at 4:02 am

    Troll of the week… keeping company with Abu and his/her multiple personalities then?

  27. Tomm
    July 21, 2009 at 6:20 am

    Don’t know “abu”.

    But aren’t you glad we’re not going to the polls this summer? That would be dreary.

    I’m hoping that we keep this government until next spring. That way, good or bad, they are forced to wear whatever happens. The CPC can campaign on what they did, and the LPC can campaign on what Canada needs, that is different.

    If we are in the middle of this morass during the campaign, it is more likely just a big old fashioned poo fling.

    To quote the Great Helmsman himself “If we fail to reach the Great Wall we are no heroes!”

  28. redtory
    July 21, 2009 at 7:18 am

    I’m sick of elections. Especially when the choice is largely six of one vs. half a dozen of the other (or as South Park would have it, “Shit Sandwich vs. Douchebag”).

  29. Coffee
    July 21, 2009 at 7:25 am

    red,

    you are sick of “elections” – is an “X” too much work? Or, are you sick of the noise – both listening to it and creating it.

    Cheers, Coffee

  30. redtory
    July 21, 2009 at 7:51 am

    No, I always vote — no trouble X-ercising my franchise and all that, and obviously I’m interested in politics generally. I am, however, sick of elections that don’t seem to mean anything. The last federal one was a joke and the last provincial one here in B.C. was a fairly vapid affair.

  31. Coffee
    July 21, 2009 at 7:56 am

    meaningless elections without end, that is your concern… and your anti-passion.

  32. Ti-Guy
    July 21, 2009 at 9:14 am

    The last federal one was a joke…

    I think of it as a scandal more than a joke. The beginning of last year should have marked the time when we all should have started talking about the impending economic crash (I don’t think it’s possible for most people nowadays to start worrying about something more than six months in advance, if that) and the election should have been about that. Instead, the news media spent the first part of last year pretending nothing was going or focused exclusively on the theatrics of our Parliament and then was caught with its pants down when the election (and the economic crisis) hit.

    I can’t stop thinking that was all planned. Of course, never assume malice when stupidity is also an obvious explanation. But I do think some at the very top of our corporate media elite colluded in some fashion. Even the CBC. Remember, the clapped out John Cruickshank was news publisher until the fall.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s