I have been noticing lately..when folks discuss political or other hot issues
they do not use proper names..
i.e Harpo or King Harpo...
that makes no logic to me.. if someone can explain it to me..

I don't get it either, but I do think it's ridiculous. I'm not a fan of disrespecting party names either. e.g., the Fiberals, the Liebruls.

It's much worse when the press does it, mind you. (There's a local columnist who does this quite a bit.)

I don't get it either, but I do think it's ridiculous. I'm not a fan of disrespecting party names either. e.g., the Fiberals, the Liebruls.

It's much worse when the press does it, mind you. (There's a local columnist who does this quite a bit.)

I hope going in future we respect the names of person/place/thing..
Just makes the person IMHO less for doing so... also lessens the impact what your trying to prove.

I have been noticing lately..when folks discuss political or other hot issues
they do not use proper names..
i.e Harpo or King Harpo...
that makes no logic to me.. if someone can explain it to me..

As your title states, It's simply a sign of disrespect.

It can be born of many things, but mostly I expect it's a feeling a powerlessness. The name calling creates an illusion of control, which in turn makes you feel better about yourself.

Respect is earned not automatic. Mocking political figures is old as there is a polity.

Bush Jr perhaps set a record....

Table of nicknames

[edit]Neutral or positive
Some nicknames are used in a neutral sense, a positive sense, or in an ironic way mocking the positive sense:

W - distinguishing son from father by his middle initial
Dubya - folksy Texan pronunciation of his middle initial W
GW - the initials of both his first and middle names
Bush II - implying a dynastic succession from father to son
Bush-43 - meaning the 43rd president, distinguishing son from father (who is referred to as Bush-41)
Liberator of Baghdad - praising the US invasion of Iraq as a "liberation" of the Iraqi people from dictator Saddam Hussein
The Bushinator - likening his military prowess to that of the lead role in The Terminator

[edit]Negative
President Bush's political opponents often use nicknames for him in a disparaging sense, such as:

W - distinguishing son from father by his middle initial
Dubya - folksy Texan pronunciation of his middle initial W
GW - the initials of both his first and middle names
King George, King George II, Little George - implying he's as oppressive as the British monarchy was toward the early American colonists - used by Howard Dean in a campaign speech September 23, 2003 [1]
Junior - suggesting that he's not on a par with his father
Baby Bush - distinguishing him from Poppy Bush (the nickname of choice for George H. W. Bush)
Bush Baby - a crack likening him to an African primate (see galago)
Shrub - pun on his last name, since he's a smaller Bush. This nickname was popularized by Texas newspaper columnist Molly Ivins.
Uncurious George - motivated by his chimp-like resemblance to fictional monkey Curious George and by his intolerance for diverging fact and opinion. Usual "I know you are but what am I liberal tag" (See "put some Ice on it, Bill Clinton)
Bushie - belittling diminutive (compare Moonie)
Dumbo - implying that Bush is an idiot
Dumbya - hybrid of Dumbo and Dubya
Shrubya - hybrid of Shrub and Dubya
Gush - coupled with "Bore" in descriptions of Election 2000 as the "Gush and Bore election", juxtaposing his surname spooneristically with that of Al Gore (whose only two nicknames, by marked contrast, are Al Bore and Al Snore)
Bushitler - used by his most extreme opponents to express hatred towards the US president and to liken him to Adolf Hitler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AList_of_nicknames_for_George_W._Bush

Harper has earned his share of negatives....

I hope going in future we respect the names of person/place/thing..
Just makes the person IMHO less for doing so... also lessens the impact what your trying to prove.

Absolutely.

Saying you hate a particular politician and what they are doing and why you hate it is so much stronger than fiddling with the name.

Sure, once in a blue moon, it makes for a cute punchline, but mostly? XX)

I agree. It's weak shorthand to impress the people in your posse. '

MacDoc, your idea here is simply wrong. Some of your pet politicians are also reviled by others and have attracted a long string of nicknames. This has nothing to do with how we should debate the issues here.

Everyone deserves criticism occasionally.. some more than others, myself very much included.

I'm don't agree with doing it with derogatory terms, insulting, or disrespecting etc... Especially in the case of political discussion, I think it really cheapens what is important issues. I hate the characterizing of political figures, both political figures I'm for and against. I can't stand Rob Ford's politics, but mocking him as a pig etc.. Also, I still am really against any reporting going anywhere near the man's house. Everyone is entitled to their privacy.

The only time I don't really care about disrespecting someone, is in the realm of sports. You call the Leafs the Toronto Maple Laughs, and I'll call the Montreal soccer team (L'Impact de Montreal) the Montreal Limp Act. :) I think that is the realm that we as society have setup to get out are "Aggression" and tribal arguments in a theatre that we've purposely setup in that manner.

For politics and religious discussions, I'm not for the WWE style rhetoric. If creates characters, and just completely polarizes issues to "For us, or against us". Some of the most admired politicians to me, are ones that are able to work with and for people from both spectrums to come up with good compromises and balance.

Do actually read the OP MF

I have been noticing lately..when folks discuss political or other hot issues
they do not use proper names..
i.e Harpo or King Harpo...
that makes no logic to me.. if someone can explain it to me..

There is nothing that the maker over of Canada would like than automatic kowtows from his subservient citzenry ....ain't gonna happen despite wishful thinking from his adherents for whom he apparently can do no wrong. :rolleyes:

Respect for the Office of the PM is one thing, respect for the holder??....earned.
He hasn't outside of a very vanishingly instances.

The answer to your question that comes to my mind macintosh doctor is that such people actually disrespect those public figures and thus why the they disrespect their names and titles and any anyone who may respect them... makes them feel all puffed and proud and holier than though.

I suspect that they may have a propensity to disrespect many more people that they know intimately as well but just do it behind their back...

Last time I brought this up in the political thread I got dumped on by more than one member claiming it was their right to call people derogatory names simply because they were in politics. I used to do the same, so am guilty as well, but no more after the reputation thread discussion and read MLeh and Sonal's opinion of it.

The way I figure it is if people want to show their ignorance and continue name calling, my attitude is let em go at it, with a healthy dose of my respect for them gone with their use of such terms.

That's all we can do to attempt to help things change is to let them know we disapprove and perhaps we should consider quoting them and correcting the language to drive the point home. Change here will not occur without the majority jumping on the minority who do this time after time.

Yeah sure oh Fiberal mocker :rolleyes:

Same coterie trying insist on unearned respect for their darling.
He gets respect when he earns it.
You can call him the Grand High Poobah for all I care or it matters.

This is the guy that tried to get the Government of Canada website turned into Stephen Harper's Government......give me a break.

Shall we haul out the Harper's sins thread for review.

The OP asked about why politics - it's got a long tradition and I suspect there is still Roman graffiti mocking some silly Senator or another from a couple millennia ago.

Like I said:

The way I figure it is if people want to show their ignorance and continue name calling, my attitude is let em go at it, with a healthy dose of my respect for them gone with their use of such terms.

By all means be my guest and carry on. People CAN change, can YOU?

You can trace mockery of politicians through the likes of Air Farce and every single newspaper that publishes cartoons.....with the possible exception of Iran and North Korea.

http://mapleleafweb.com/files/cartoon/jan1410.jpg?1263836749

An image that requires thought from the reader is one thing, but please point out to me where in that example of yours it says 'King Harpo' or 'Cons'? I seem to be missing that. It's called opinion with finesse using art, not derogatory crap. ;)

Sorry but Politicians in particular have to earn my respect. Call him whatever you like but the current PM and his immediate predecessors have failed miserably to do so. I am referring directly to bills C-11 or C-30, both of which were originally put on the table by Liberal Governments. These bills were drafted by the PMs power base to the detriment of taxpaying Canadians. When our Politicians start putting the interests of taxpaying Canadians ahead of their Power Buds then I will show them all the respect in the world and believe me, they will have earned it.

Others are of course free to disagree and I completely respect their right to do so.

The exceptions such as former Alberta Lt. Governor Grant MacEwan who did indeed earn my respect are always referred to accordingly and deservedly so.

Political cartoons in newspapers do so in a humorous way with the cartoon directed directly at the politician or political party. The problem in a political thread with debate with fellow ehMac members, is that mostly the comments are intended to mock the member being debated who has support for those political parties.

It's perfectly ok to take politicians to tasks for errors (Actual or perceived), and it can be done without silly WWE style mud-slinging, that's creeping more and more into Canadian politics.

Name calling of this nature is generally a race to the bottom and denotes emotional & immature re-actionism, rather than intellectual & mature discourse aimed at finding mutually beneficial solutions to the issues in today's world.

Use of such pejoratives certainly doesn't make me respect the opinion of the poster more. Actually, it results in less. I usually stop reading so their opinion is completely unheard, unnoticed, and un-responded to.

Sorry but Politicians in particular have to earn my respect.

Others are of course free to disagree and I completely respect their right to do so.

The exceptions such as former Alberta Lt. Governor Grant MacEwan who did indeed earn my respect are always referred to accordingly and deservedly so.

No argument there at all. There have been many people in my life I did not respect, but there was no need for me to refer to them in derogatory terms. It only demonstrates why I too should be disrespected now that I think about it.

And that is the simple fact most name callers miss. Now that I know that is fact, I will change.

Sorry but Politicians in particular have to earn my respect. Call him whatever you like but the current PM and his immediate predecessors have failed miserably to do so. I am referring directly to bills C-11 or C-30, both of which were originally put on the table by Liberal Governments. These bills were drafted by the PMs power base to the detriment of taxpaying Canadians. When our Politicians start putting the interests of taxpaying Canadians ahead of their Power Buds then I will show them all the respect in the world and believe me, they will have earned it.

Others are of course free to disagree and I completely respect their right to do so.

The exceptions such as former Alberta Lt. Governor Grant MacEwan who did indeed earn my respect are always referred to accordingly and deservedly so.

I think it's perfectly fine to state your point of view in that manner. It's not about agreeing or disagreeing with a politician, or respecting the decisions, actions and policies the politician has done. By all means, have at them on both sides of the fence.

It degrades though and becomes disrespectful (Not just to politician, but to those ehMac members who agree with the politicians policies etc...) when comments like lap puppies, Fiberals, Neo Cons, King Harpo, etc.. etc.. start being used. If anything, it's just immature, redundant, and boring IMO and drives people away from the conversation. It certainly doesn't change anybodies mind, it most likely hardens positions and polarizes people father left or right.

Unfortunately, most of these politicians could care less if they had your respect...just your vote.

This thread is not an example of using names disrespectfully for politics, but applies to all things.. but I can see that there are a few - that really don't understand what respect means.. so its beating a dead dog at this point ..

Name calling of this nature is generally a race to the bottom and denotes emotional & immature re-actionism, rather than intellectual & mature discourse aimed at finding mutually beneficial solutions to the issues in today's world.

Use of such pejoratives certainly doesn't make me respect the opinion of the poster more. Actually, it results in less. I usually stop reading so their opinion is completely unheard, unnoticed, and un-responded to.

Exactly.
This isn't about agreeing with one side of an issue or another, not is it about respect for the individual. But carrying on with mocking language (either parties or names) is in poor form and says more about the individual who feels it necessary to resort to their use and is distracting from whatever point is trying to be made.

I think it's perfectly fine to state your point of view in that manner. It's not about agreeing or disagreeing with a politician, or respecting the decisions, actions and policies the politician has done. By all means, have at them on both sides of the fence.

It degrades though and becomes disrespectful (Not just to politician, but to those ehMac members who agree with the politicians policies etc...) when comments like lap puppies, Fiberals, Neo Cons, King Harpo, etc.. etc.. start being used. If anything, it's just immature, redundant, and boring IMO and drives people away from the conversation. It certainly doesn't change anybodies mind, it most likely hardens positions and polarizes people father left or right.

Can I get an Amen?

'lap puppies' in particular gets under my skin. In the context it was typically used, it was aimed at poster here who disagreed with the poster. There's no call for that.

Do actually read the OP MF



There is nothing that the maker over of Canada would like than automatic kowtows from his subservient citzenry ....ain't gonna happen despite wishful thinking from his adherents for whom he apparently can do no wrong. :rolleyes:

Respect for the Office of the PM is one thing, respect for the holder??....earned.
He hasn't outside of a very vanishingly instances.

No, not respect for the holder. I found Stephane Dion a dreadful political figure, but I was always careful to spell his name correctly.

If I have to resort to name calling, I've failed to do my research properly.

I've had very low regard for some politicians but I do tend to use their actual name. I am guilty of referring to George W. Bush as "dumb-ya" as a play on his own self-appointed nickname of Dubya (thus, calling him Dubya is not, in my view, disrespectful but merely shorthand).

I agree that derogatory names are childish and bullying, but everyone lapses on this point from time to time. It's the ones who never vary from using derogatory terms that shouldn't, IMHO, be taken terribly seriously -- since they willingly undermine whatever point they were trying to make with such behaviour.

Using an incorrect or derogitory name is just a spurious form of argument. When facts and logic fail, bolster your position with argument from authority on one hand and by denigrating and hence lowering the status of the opponent or contrary side of the argument on the other.

It is both lack or respect for the process in and of itself and lack of respect for, or abject fear of the opponent.

Name calling of this nature is generally a race to the bottom and denotes emotional & immature re-actionism, rather than intellectual & mature discourse aimed at finding mutually beneficial solutions to the issues in today's world.

Use of such pejoratives certainly doesn't make me respect the opinion of the poster more. Actually, it results in less. I usually stop reading so their opinion is completely unheard, unnoticed, and un-responded to.

+1 Agreed 100%. :clap:

Or, as my mother put it "You don't raise yourself up by putting others down."

I think some of you just take the discussion here faaaaar toooo seriously. Like ehMac sets the pulse of Canadian politics...or something.

If we were all sitting around a table drinking beer, I have no doubt there'd be plenty of derogatory names flying with respect to our lovely politicians....and worse.

I don't take it 'seriously', but if I were sitting in a bar and someone called me a 'CON apologist' or something similar I'd probably want to smack 'em.

Fortunately I can be pickier about my drinking buddies than I can be with fellow forum participants, and it is easier to change the subject in real life. (I had friends over last weekend who started in on politics and I deftly changed the subject to something less provocative as I am aware that they have very different political views from my own, although I don't think they're aware of my views on the subject. It's probably why we're still friends.)

I don't take it 'seriously', but if I were sitting in a bar and someone called me a 'CON apologist' or something similar I'd probably want to smack 'em.
)

Atta girl, hate to see what would have happened if they called you Harper's "lap puppy". LOL

You have a point, meat space is different from cyberspace, but come on, we're all friends here...;)

I think some of you just take the discussion here faaaaar toooo seriously. Like ehMac sets the pulse of Canadian politics...or something.

If we were all sitting around a table drinking beer, I have no doubt there'd be plenty of derogatory names flying with respect to our lovely politicians....and worse.

Atta girl, hate to see what would have happened if they called you Harper's "lap puppy". LOL

You have a point, meat space is different from cyberspace, but come on, we're all friends here...;)

Not in my world kps as my friends and family know that I work on Parliament Hill and know that I would get up up and leave if the conversation sank to that level.

It's just being respectful of others who may hold options that differ from your own to not resort to such low brow and childish tactics.

Not in my world kps as my friends and family know that I work on Parliament Hill and know that I would get up up and leave if the conversation sank to that level.

It's just being respectful of others who may hold options that differ from your own to not resort to such low brow and childish tactics.

Yes, absolutely.

Even if you choose not to respect the politician, at least respect the people here by not repeatedly sinking to that level.

Sure, everyone can get heated at times and slip up, or even once in a while it can be very funny--but when it's used repeatedly, it's tiresome.

I've made my share of Mayor Ford jokes (mostly not here) and I've made no secret of my dislike for the man, but for the most part, I refer to him by either his name or his title.... and I'm pretty sure my dislike for the man comes through clearly.

(EDIT TO ADD: I confess to frequently calling Ignatief 'Iggy', but mostly out of fear of misspelling Ignatief. So my bad on that one.)

Not in my world kps as my friends and family know that I work on Parliament Hill and know that I would get up up and leave if the conversation sank to that level.

It's just being respectful of others who may hold options that differ from your own to not resort to such low brow and childish tactics.

Naturally it would depend on who you're with,where and under what circumstances.

I feel confortable here on ehMac to let some of my more sardonic personality through. :D

Not in my world kps as my friends and family know that I work on Parliament Hill and know that I would get up up and leave if the conversation sank to that level.

It's just being respectful of others who may hold options that differ from your own to not resort to such low brow and childish tactics.

First of all life would be very boring if everyone held the same opinions.

Secondly I disagree with about 70% of any given parties platform. However I find it strange that referring to the PM as OGL (Our Glorious Leader) or King Harpo is somehow translated into personal attacks by those who happen believe in him more than I do. These are simple shorthand methods that convey an individuals opinion of another individual and are in no way intended as personal attacks on members of ehMac.

I suppose if that somehow lacks the proper subservience we could perhaps refer to: Massa Vic Toews when talking about his Privacy Demolition Bill. Perhaps something along the lines: "Yassuh Massa, yousa kin tappa my phonza anna reada ma emailza any ole times yousa hassa mind to. But pleasa doan call me no kiddie porner"<Insert sarcasm emoticon here>

First of all life would be very boring if everyone held the same opinions.

Secondly I disagree with about 70% of any given parties platform. However I find it strange that referring to the PM as OGL (Our Glorious Leader) or King Harpo is somehow translated into personal attacks by those who happen believe in him more than I do. These are simple shorthand methods that convey an individuals opinion of another individual and are in no way intended as personal attacks on members of ehMac.

I suppose if that somehow lacks the proper subservience we could perhaps refer to: Massa Vic Toews when talking about his Privacy Demolition Bill. Perhaps something along the lines: "Yassuh Massa, yousa kin tappa my phonza anna reada ma emailza any ole times yousa hassa mind to. But pleasa doan call me no kiddie porner"<Insert sarcasm emoticon here>

Your opinion is usually well-conveyed without the 'shorthand'.

And even if it's is not intended as an attack, it often comes off as one.

Moreover, it makes you look bad as well. I have never in my life voted Conservative, and to be honest when I see all that 'King Harpo' stuff I am a lot less likely to read or think about what the poster is actually saying.

your opinion is usually well-conveyed without the 'shorthand'.

And even if it's is not intended as an attack, it often comes off as one.

moreover, it makes you look bad as well. I have never in my life voted conservative, and to be honest when i see all that 'king harpo' stuff i am a lot less likely to read or think about what the poster is actually saying.

+1

When we see something less that undying devotion to Harper and "Harper can do no wrong" from his adherents then maybe there is some common discussion.

The right wing is far too much Bush , "for us or agin us" and not much has changed.

Even the NDP suffers from the same blinkers....Rae and Chretien at least even tho speaking on the left still understand cooperative action and compromise.

Harper and his right wing supporters - but Harper in particular, with the attack dog ads and such earns NOTHING but disrespect for both the process and the agenda and the leader of both and brings disrespect to Canada and it's institutions..
Once considered a world leader in ecology we are flat out a pariah in that regard.

Until Harper's actions speak to governing ALL the people with all views considered instead of the ideology of HIS view.....then there much to criticize and little to praise.

As long as his adherents can't bring themselves to criticize him and the truly despicable actions of some of the party members - and make excuses- then there is no common ground and distain and flipping the bird is all that remains.

Do you really think that an ideologue systematically demolishing the environmental and science and cultural institutions of Canada while catering to big oil will be venerated by the majority of Canadians??? Texas light???!!! XX) horse pucky.

If you do you are dreaming in technicolour.

When Harper SHOWS he's a centrist and not a right wing ideologue, then maybe a discussion with people willing to both praise AND criticize on both sides of the spectrum might occur.

Until then all this dissing here is merely a microcosm of the rancorous pit of vipers that is supposedly our national parliament.

A pox on the lot of them. :mad:

As long as his adherents can't bring themselves to criticize him and the truly despicable actions of some of the party members - and make excuses- then there is no common ground and distain and flipping the bird is all that remains.

Of the people on this forum who immediately come to mind when someone talks about 'Harper-supporters', I've seen all of them disagree with choices that Harper has made.

So I don't agree with you that his adherents (at least as far as this board is concerned) can't bring themselves to criticize.

That they don't disagree with all the choices he's made, or that they don't disagree with the choices that you strongly disagree with, doesn't make them unable to criticize. And there will never be any common ground for discussion on this forum so long as people do not recognize that.

When Harper SHOWS he's a centrist and not a right wing ideologue, then maybe a discussion with people willing to both praise AND criticize on both sides of the spectrum might occur.

Harper is not a centrist. That's why I voted for him. I don't agree with everything he does by a longshot, but I despise the very notion of catering to the mushy middle.

If you can't be polite because a non-centrist party won't govern like centrists, then it appears there's little hope to for you to engage in civil discourse.

To be blunt about it. I tend to view most politicians as professional thieves equipped with an unlimited supply of "Get Out of Jail Free" cards. Sorry if this lacks the proper deferential perspective, but those with differing views are encouraged to demonstrate the fallacy of that view but so far have been remarkably amiss in doing so.

Still I maintain that referring to the PM as Harpo is a way of showing respect for those innocent Canadians, who at this point in time have the misfortune to carry the name Harper.

Still I maintain that referring to the PM as Harpo is a way of showing respect for those innocent Canadians, who at this point in time have the misfortune to carry the name Harper.

And what of those named Harpo? beejacon

Too much unnecessary Harping going on around here....

Of the people on this forum who immediately come to mind when someone talks about 'Harper-supporters', I've seen all of them disagree with choices that Harper has made.

So I don't agree with you that his adherents (at least as far as this board is concerned) can't bring themselves to criticize.

That they don't disagree with all the choices he's made, or that they don't disagree with the choices that you strongly disagree with, doesn't make them unable to criticize. And there will never be any common ground for discussion on this forum so long as people do not recognize that.


fine talk - wanna show the proof??? - I've yet to see the adherents not try and justify a Harper & co face plant or make some inane comment about the Liberalsdiditsoitsokay....
Perception is optics and the optics are close minded single trackers. Shall I bring up the trashing of Canada's green reputation and the dismantling of the ecological science institutions as prime evidence?
Show me the balanced critiques from the rabid right of Canada's horrid embarrassing performance at the Climate Conferences....

respect is earned - Harper and Harp Co haven't.
Tell me why he's down to 20% approval and respect should be granted!!!???

While two months ago 31% of respondents said he was the most trustworthy leader in Ottawa, that number dropped to 20% in the April poll.

Harper’s competence score also dropped sharply, from 38% of respondents who thought he was the most competent party leader, to 24.2%.



20% trust him......and you want veneration ???!!! :rolleyes:

fine talk - wanna show the proof??? - I've yet to see the adherents not try and justify a Harper & co face plant or make some inane comment about the Liberalsdiditsoitsokay....
Perception is optics and the optics are close minded single trackers. Shall I bring up the trashing of Canada's green reputation and the dismantling of the ecological science institutions as prime evidence?
Show me the balanced critiques from the rabid right of Canada's horrid embarrassing performance at the Climate Conferences....

respect is earned - Harper and Harp Co haven't.
Tell me why he's down to 20% approval and respect should be granted!!!???



20% trust him......and you want veneration ???!!! :rolleyes:

Does anyone real trust politicians? Right or Left. I know I don't no matter what side I vote on.

fine talk - wanna show the proof??? - I've yet to see the adherents not try and justify a Harper & co face plant or make some inane comment about the Liberalsdiditsoitsokay....

The Omar Khadr thread immediately comes to mind.

So does that whole Vic Toews/"your either with us or with child pornographers" issue.

fine talk - wanna show the proof??? - I've yet to see the adherents not try and justify a Harper & co face plant or make some inane comment about the Liberalsdiditsoitsokay....
Perception is optics and the optics are close minded single trackers. Shall I bring up the trashing of Canada's green reputation and the dismantling of the ecological science institutions as prime evidence?
Show me the balanced critiques from the rabid right of Canada's horrid embarrassing performance at the Climate Conferences....

respect is earned - Harper and Harp Co haven't.
Tell me why he's down to 20% approval and respect should be granted!!!???



20% trust him......and you want veneration ???!!! :rolleyes:

Again failing to see the difference between 'veneration' (not expected) and simple courtesy and capability to perceive and maybe even respect opinions other than your own.

In any case you continue to generalize in your posts. This one has 'adherents' and 'rabid right'? Can you not even perceive as you type how you offend?

You're on ignore.

The Omar Khadr thread immediately comes to mind.

So does that whole Vic Toews/"your either with us or with child pornographers" issue.

I think at this point Sonal it may be better to just agree to disagree with MacDoc as it seems he only pays attention to threads and posts that bear witness to his own biases and proclivities.

He is adamant in stating that respect is earned all the while posting nothing that would earn him anything on that front from anyone other than from those with whom he agrees or agree with him.

And what of those named Harpo? beejacon

Aye there's the rub. Though Harpo Marx probably lost interest when he died.:D

I think at this point Sonal it may be better to just agree to disagree with MacDoc as it seems he only pays attention to threads and posts that bear witness to his own biases and proclivities.

He is adamant in stating that respect is earned all the while posting nothing that would earn him anything on that front from anyone other than those with whom he agrees or agree with him.

You are right.

But seeing staring out the window at the lovely weather today whilst stuck inside the office has already shot my productivity to bits today, I may as well pass the time this way as any.... :lmao:

My expectations for politicians are quite low. So low in fact that even the most physically challenged of the lot could shuffle over that bar without stubbing a toe or breaking a heel.

So when I see the contortions most of them resort to in order to slide under that bar, I have to poke fun at them. Since I am pretty much convinced that they all dance to the same fiddle I grant no exemptions based on party. :rolleyes:

I do make exceptions for integrity but sadly that is getting mighty hard to find.:-(

My expectations for politicians are quite low. So low in fact that even the most physically challenged of the lot could shuffle over that bar without stubbing a toe or breaking a heel.

So when I see the contortions most of them resort to in order to slide under that bar, I have to poke fun at them. Since I am pretty much convinced that they all dance to the same fiddle I grant no exemptions based on party. :rolleyes:

I do make exceptions for integrity but sadly that is getting mighty hard to find.:-(

Most politicians work very hard and sacrifice much... family time, sometimes marriages fail and often their health suffers and relatively speaking for the time and effort they put in they aren't that well paid relative private sector executives.

When you say politicians you are including 3 levels of government, municipal, provincial and federal so in Canada alone there are thousands of politicians. To paint them all with the same brush is highly prejudiced based on the actions of a few.

Do you know any politicians? Have you ever had to work with them? How many have you even actually met? Over the years I have met probably over 100 and known many quite well and worked with a few less. I can tell you from first hand experience that what you think you might know about politicians in general based on what you read in the media is not representative of the reality of who these people really are or their character...

Kind of like do you think you know the real lives and characters of celebrities by reading People Magazine?

Show me the balanced critiques from the rabid right of Canada's horrid embarrassing performance at the Climate Conferences....

Why should there be "balance" if they are taking the correct course? The Conservatives perfectly reflect my views on climate so I will not criticize them on that... but I have criticized them on others.

Most politicians work very hard and sacrifice much... family time, sometimes marriages fail and often their health suffers and relatively speaking for the time and effort they put in they aren't that well paid relative private sector executives.

When you say politicians you are including 3 levels of government, municipal, provincial and federal so in Canada alone there are thousands of politicians. To paint them all with the same brush is highly prejudiced based on the actions of a few.

Do you know any politicians? Have you ever had to work with them? How many have you even actually met? Over the years I have met probably over 100 and known many quite well and worked with a few less. I can tell you from first hand experience that what you think you might know about politicians in general based on what you read in the media is not representative of the reality of who these people really are or their character...

Kind of like do you think you know the real lives and characters of celebrities by reading People Magazine?

Cry me a river. Becoming a politician is a choice. Regardless of their private sector counterparts they are decently compensated and have a tasty pension. I doubt the majority of them go into it for noble reasons.

It's always been this way. Nothing new here.

Cry me a river. Becoming a politician is a choice. Regardless of their private sector counterparts they are decently compensated and have a tasty pension. I doubt the majority of them go into it for noble reasons.

It's always been this way. Nothing new here.

Why would you say this? All I am saying is that for people who wish to deride politicians as a whole without ever having walked a mile in their shoes they really have no idea of what the job really entails and the sacrifices that are made. I have seen the lives they live first hand and I can tell you I would never want their job as the hours are long, the stress levels very high, with very often ill effects on their family lives and health.

Virtually everything in life is a choice.

How many of them have you met to even begin to know if this is true or not?

How many of them have you met to even begin to know if this is true or not?

This point is irrelevant. I don't need to have met one to hold a valid, insightful and informed opinion.

The world is full of stressful jobs. What about the single Mom who needs to work three of them just to make ends meet?

You say 'sacrifices made' as if this is some noble calling. I'll leave that one to soldiers, police and firefighters. Not pork barreling, 5 Star isn't good enough politicians.

Politicians put themselves out there. They are easy targets, especially when they are constantly generating controversy. Fair game, I say.

This point is irrelevant. I don't need to have met one to hold a valid, insightful and informed opinion.

The world is full of stressful jobs. What about the single Mom who needs to work three of them just to make ends meet?

You say 'sacrifices made' as if this is some noble calling. I'll leave that one to soldiers, police and firefighters. Not pork barreling, 5 Star isn't good enough politicians.

Politicians put themselves out there. They are easy targets, especially when they are constantly generating controversy. Fair game, I say.

It certainly isn't. I would never be so presumptuous as to claim to know the character of a whole group of people without ever having met a single one of them and even then people are individuals and shouldn't be judged as a whole based on the actions of few, that is the basis of bigotry and prejudice.

Of course the world is full of stressful jobs, the point was not made for comparison to what others do.

It seems that some people here wish to deride politicians without having any first hand knowledge of them or what they do and the demands that the job entails but are all too willing to portray them all as being the same which is basically of low moral character and only acting out of self interest. I can tell you that I know this for a fact to not be the case and is why I mentioned the demands of the job and sacrifices that are made while holding public office. If all politicians were purely self interested there are much more financially rewarding careers where the same demands are not present and the same sacrifices not required.

Many people do view the call to public life as a noble calling (or at least see that it can be) as they wish to bring about some change that they view as being for the better. That we do not all agree as to what change is considered to be for the better is not surprising. But the politicians that I have met have almost universally become involved in politics (often beginning at the municipal level) because they wanted to see some "wrong" righted and to make a difference in the lives of the people in their community/province/country, not out of avarice and/or a quest for power. I am sure this is the case for some but not even close to being all or even the majority in my experience.

This is how knowing or having met some of the individuals out of a whole group that one chooses to deride is completely relevant. It informs and leads one to have an educated first hand opinion of people as opposed to relying on the 2nd hand opinions of the media (who in many cases have never met the people they write about either) and their biases and predjudices.

It certainly isn't. I would never be so presumptuous as to claim to know the character of a whole group of people without ever having met a single one of them and even then people are individuals and shouldn't be judged as a whole based on the actions of few, that is the basis of bigotry and prejudice.

Who said I don't know any politicians?

Generally speaking, politicians rank right up there with used car salesmen in the court of public opinion. Plead as you may, nothing is going to change that. They are there for good reason.

Of course the world is full of stressful jobs, the point was not made for comparison to what others do.

Simply by stating that their job is stressful you are setting it up as a point of comparison.

It seems that some people here wish to deride politicians without having any first hand knowledge of them or what they do and the demands that the job entails but are all too willing to portray them all as being the same which is basically of low moral character and only acting out of self interest. I can tell you that I know this for a fact to not be the case and is why I mentioned the demands of the job and sacrifices that are made while holding public office. If all politicians were purely self interested there are much more financially rewarding careers where the same demands are not present and the same sacrifices not required.

I guess somebody has to believe in them. ;)

Many people do view the call to public life as a noble calling (or at least see that it can be) as they wish to bring about some change that they view as being for the better. That we do not all agree as to what change is considered to be for the better is not surprising. But the politicians that I have met have almost universally become involved in politics (often beginning at the municipal level) because they wanted to see some "wrong" righted and to make a difference in the lives of the people in their community/province/country, not out of avarice and/or a quest for power. I am sure this is the case for some but not even close to being all or even the majority in my experience.

They started out as idealists and then became politicians.

This is how knowing or having met some of the individuals out of a whole group that one chooses to deride is completely relevant. It informs and leads one to have an educated first hand opinion of people as opposed to relying on the 2nd hand opinions of the media (who in many cases have never met the people they write about either) and their biases and predjudices.


The media? Try the history books.

I think you two are really more talking at cross purposes than anything else.

Mrjimmy, I think you're guilty of not acknowledging that there are different levels of politician. A city alderman or councillor in a small town is a politician, but not really the same kind as, let's say, a Prime Minister.

OTOH, I think screature is being a teensy bit dishonest by not reminding you that he (IIRC, please correct me if I'm wrong) works for the government. As a disclaimer at the very least.

I take screature's point about overgeneralising politicians and agree with him -- you've made a point of not offering any proof that you have the personal experience necessary to form an opinion on ALL politicians.

As it happens I've met several VERY ethical, very service-minded politicians. Only one up here, mind you, but I'm fairly new up here. But my former State Representative, Scott Randolph of Winter Park, FL, is someone I knew personally and I learned a LOT about the sacrifices one makes and the sheer amount of work (and INCREDIBLY BORING READING AND MEETINGS) involved in the job. Like a lot of "real" politicians, Randolph doesn't care much for the fundraising and glad-handing -- he feels he is there to get good law passed that will benefit his (and the area generally's) constituency, but the PR stuff is how that gets done.

Doesn't sound like YOUR definition of a "politician" much, does it?

I think you two are really more talking at cross purposes than anything else.

Mrjimmy, I think you're guilty of not acknowledging that there are different levels of politician. A city alderman or councillor in a small town is a politician, but not really the same kind as, let's say, a Prime Minister.

OTOH, I think screature is being a teensy bit dishonest by not reminding you that he (IIRC, please correct me if I'm wrong) works for the government. As a disclaimer at the very least.

I take screature's point about overgeneralising politicians and agree with him -- you've made a point of not offering any proof that you have the personal experience necessary to form an opinion on ALL politicians.

As it happens I've met several VERY ethical, very service-minded politicians. Only one up here, mind you, but I'm fairly new up here. But my former State Representative, Scott Randolph of Winter Park, FL, is someone I knew personally and I learned a LOT about the sacrifices one makes and the sheer amount of work (and INCREDIBLY BORING READING AND MEETINGS) involved in the job. Like a lot of "real" politicians, Randolph doesn't care much for the fundraising and glad-handing -- he feels he is there to get good law passed that will benefit his (and the area generally's) constituency, but the PR stuff is how that gets done.

Doesn't sound like YOUR definition of a "politician" much, does it?

I guess you missed the 'generally speaking' part.

a. I include all stripes of politician, be they federal or otherwise.
b. I am aware of screature's involvement in the Government. Hard not to be.
c. Politicians aren't held in such low regard by accident.

I'm happy you and screature have had good experiences. That fits nicely into the caveat, 'generally speaking'. Will it change my or the court of public opinion's mind? Not likely.

I think you two are really more talking at cross purposes than anything else.

Mrjimmy, I think you're guilty of not acknowledging that there are different levels of politician. A city alderman or councillor in a small town is a politician, but not really the same kind as, let's say, a Prime Minister.

OTOH, I think screature is being a teensy bit dishonest by not reminding you that he (IIRC, please correct me if I'm wrong) works for the government. As a disclaimer at the very least.

I take screature's point about overgeneralising politicians and agree with him -- you've made a point of not offering any proof that you have the personal experience necessary to form an opinion on ALL politicians.

As it happens I've met several VERY ethical, very service-minded politicians. Only one up here, mind you, but I'm fairly new up here. But my former State Representative, Scott Randolph of Winter Park, FL, is someone I knew personally and I learned a LOT about the sacrifices one makes and the sheer amount of work (and INCREDIBLY BORING READING AND MEETINGS) involved in the job. Like a lot of "real" politicians, Randolph doesn't care much for the fundraising and glad-handing -- he feels he is there to get good law passed that will benefit his (and the area generally's) constituency, but the PR stuff is how that gets done.

Doesn't sound like YOUR definition of a "politician" much, does it?

I have stated the fact that I work on Parliament Hill many times chas_m. That is how I have met and known all the politicians that I have so while I appreciate your commentary I was not being in the least bit dishonest just speaking from personal experience.

I guess you missed the 'generally speaking' part.

a. I include all stripes of politician, be they federal or otherwise.
b. I am aware of screature's involvement in the Government. Hard not to be.
c. Politicians aren't held in such low regard by accident.

I'm happy you and screature have had good experiences. That fits nicely into the caveat, 'generally speaking'. Will it change my or the court of public opinion's mind? Not likely.

The court of public opinion is like customers, they are always right, they even have the right to be wrong. No point in continuing with this debate, we will simply have to agree to disagree.

The court of public opinion is like customers, they are always right, they even have the right to be wrong. No point in continuing with this debate, we will simply have to agree to disagree.

Wrong in your experience, not history's.

.

Of course some of the nicknames Albertan's had for Quebec's darling PET, are not fit for a family website.

I skipped ahead but something clicked when my dad was griping about an anouncement from Flaherty that the "Harper Government was giving money to blah blah".

Seems the King Harper comment fits doesn't it? It isn't the Harper gov't. It's the Canadian Government.Seems only a king or dictator would assume a democratic government is his.

I skipped ahead but something clicked when my dad was griping about an anouncement from Flaherty that the "Harper Government was giving money to blah blah".

Seems the King Harper comment fits doesn't it? It isn't the Harper gov't. It's the Canadian Government.Seems only a king or dictator would assume a democratic government is his.

Not according to the official government letter heads ...........

:clap:

Wait a minute...that might need to be a :-(