The war on Fox. Does Canadian media tend to lean one way?

[steven lloyd]

Quietlywatching, have a look at this piece by Charles Krauthammer. He must have been reading my earlier posting.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/02/09/charles-krauthammer-the-great-peasant-revolt-of-2010.aspx

Noted this interesting response in the comments that followed:

by edd333ed
Feb 09 2010
9:36 AM

The great dialogue in American politics is between a Calvinistic right, that must reconcile predestination and individualism with the interdependence of actual modern economics, and an early Christian left, which believes in loving compassion for anything that moves and holding all other peoples' goods in common.

The system is unstable, and given to large oscillations. Republicans would prefer that the undeserving suffer for their sins, while Democrats would succour the least sheep before it can stray.

The Democrats may well have squandered their opportunity to turn the American health care system in a more economically rational direction through the bull-headedness of their left wing. It remains to be seen if the Republicans will now interpret their Massachusetts victory as a license to play dog in the manger, instead of loyal opposition.

Krauthammer omits to comment that both sides seem cursed by a notable absence of pragmatism, for many years the sustaining force of compromise in an American system otherwise susceptible to total freeze-up for ideological reasons.

[Homeownertoo]

Not sure -- uh, make that very doubtful -- if the US operates under any concept of a 'loyal opposition'. History, at any rate, puts paid to that genteel idea.

[Glacier]

I like to pick out weird contradictions in politics. I often wonder how anti-abortionists and libertarians both end up on the right. To me it seems like a inherent contradiction.

There are right-wing libertarians, but there are also left-wing libertarians (like our resident WhatThe). Same goes for abortion. While we usually peg "anti-abortionists" as right-wing, that is a stereotype. I have a friend who is in a significant position within the NDP who is an "anti-abortionist".

BTW, a libertarian who is against abortion is against it for the same reason they are against murder.

[Al Czervic]

...I think there are a lot of left of center people who really do grasp the ideas of both sides.

Yes, some understand conservative policies, but I question whether they understand the underlying reasons for those policies. For example, one can realize that rent controls don't work (just by examining the carnage they produce) without understanding why they fail, which would force the leftist to accept the conservative position. But they rarely do. Rent controls are not in place for lack of desire from the left but because conservative politicians have mustered sufficient political support to ward off such idiocies. When such support wanes, they magically reappear on political agendas.

That is actually quite a good example. The leftist simply sees the rent increasing and assumes it is a case of a landlord being greedy at his or her expense. After all the landlord most certainly has MORE money than the tenant and surely the landlord can afford NOT to raise the rent so the leftist concludes that the landlord is just being greedy. This is why ideas like rent controls are attractive to the leftists.

What the leftist will not consider or understand is that the landlord likely lost out on rent from one (or more) irresponsible tenants and this situation was likely further inflamed when a unit was significantly damaged by the tenant in question. The tenant does not see the property tax imposed by the municipality that likely increased at a rate exceeding inflation and further does not realize that a property management company taxes 3-5% and that insurance costs to a landlord are huge and increasing and even the cost for a new roof these days is insane.

Compounding all of these issues is that if a landlord chooses not to be a landlord and avoided ALL of the expense and hassles they could invest their equity in some other financial portfolio where they could earn 5% or more. In other words if the landlord cannot get a return over and above what they could get relatively easily in another investment vehicle there is simply no point in the landlord being a landlord. When that happens rental accommodations become scarcer as the landlord typically can stratify (if a multi unit building) and simply sell out if a residential. When that occurs the tenant will lose.

Right Wingers typically understand that relationship and need to earn a financial return whereas the leftist simply sees it is greed.

[quietlywatching84]

I like to pick out weird contradictions in politics. I often wonder how anti-abortionists and libertarians both end up on the right. To me it seems like a inherent contradiction.

There are right-wing libertarians, but there are also left-wing libertarians (like our resident WhatThe). Same goes for abortion. While we usually peg "anti-abortionists" as right-wing, that is a stereotype. I have a friend who is in a significant position within the NDP who is an "anti-abortionist".

BTW, a libertarian who is against abortion is against it for the same reason they are against murder.

How does your friend rationalize supporting a political party that will most likely never support any campaign to criminalize abortion? Does this person figure that the good from other policies that the NDP supports is more paramount than the one issue of abortion? I'm rather curious about that.

I'm rather curious how a left-wing libertarian looks at things as well... I'll have to ask Whatthe about this...

[Al Czervic]

I like to pick out weird contradictions in politics. I often wonder how anti-abortionists and libertarians both end up on the right. To me it seems like a inherent contradiction.

There are right-wing libertarians, but there are also left-wing libertarians (like our resident WhatThe). Same goes for abortion. While we usually peg "anti-abortionists" as right-wing, that is a stereotype. I have a friend who is in a significant position within the NDP who is an "anti-abortionist".

BTW, a libertarian who is against abortion is against it for the same reason they are against murder.

How does your friend rationalize supporting a political party that will most likely never support any campaign to criminalize abortion? Does this person figure that the good from other policies that the NDP supports is more paramount than the one issue of abortion? I'm rather curious about that.

I'm rather curious how a left-wing libertarian looks at things as well... I'll have to ask Whatthe about this...

I am about as big of a right wing nut job as you will come across and I support a women’s right to choose much as I support the rights of same sex marriage. I agree with Glacier that some political perceptions are indeed stereotypes. For example I know that not all socialists are mindless idiots, the majority of them yes, but certainly not all of them.

[quietlywatching84]

The leftist simply sees the rent increasing and assumes it is a case of a landlord being greedy at his or her expense.

Greed is often a term I seen thrown around with little or no evidence to back it up (this does not mean we don't have problems in housing, just that greed is likely not the the culprit). Rent controls are a terrible thing. Even if somebody doesn't want to look at the economic arguement that explains why it is not a good idea, just look at New York's history (earlier in the last century it tried to impose rent controls) of the disaster that occured when this concept was put into action.

I know there are a lot of housing advocacy groups in Vancouver, I should look them up and see what they are suggesting these days. We could look at it and see if these people have learned anything from the past.

[Homeownertoo]

Please do so. I'd be curious to find out.

[quietlywatching84]

I am about as big of a right wing nut job as you will come across and I support a women’s right to choose much as I support the rights of same sex marriage. I agree with Glacier that some political perceptions are indeed stereotypes

I have two names of posters in the forum who have you beat easily for that title. Your not using your intellect to it's full nutjob potential. I know your a smart guy, please put a bit more effort into this. On a more serious note...

I'm starting to think this radicalization of the two ends of the spectrum is occuring from lack of choice. It's a problem here in Canada, but to the south I think it is a huge problem. Either you have a left, or a right (both with a radicalized base). It really becomes apparent in both countries' politics when success seems to be determined by who moves towards the center the most.

I firmly believe the Conserative Party success in the last decade in Canada has been mostly from the move towards the center, while the liberals are moving back towards the left in hopes that some support still exists in that area (I'm guessing that plan will be ditched soon if isn't in the works already).

Unfortunatley, I think we probably need more parties towards the center to give the majority of voters the choice we're looking for. Even on this forum, many people are merely a swath of degrees of left of center, right of center, on the fence post, alittle more than right of center and the odd wacko for texture and flavour.

[Al Czervic]

I am about as big of a right wing nut job as you will come across and I support a women’s right to choose much as I support the rights of same sex marriage. I agree with Glacier that some political perceptions are indeed stereotypes

I have two names of posters in the forum who have you beat easily for that title. Your not using your intellect to it's full nutjob potential. I know your a smart guy, please put a bit more effort into this. On a more serious note...

I'm starting to think this radicalization of the two ends of the spectrum is occuring from lack of choice. It's a problem here in Canada, but to the south I think it is a huge problem. Either you have a left, or a right (both with a radicalized base). It really becomes apparent in both countries' politics when success seems to be determined by who moves towards the center the most.

I firmly believe the Conserative Party success in the last decade in Canada has been mostly from the move towards the center, while the liberals are moving back towards the left in hopes that some support still exists in that area (I'm guessing that plan will be ditched soon if isn't in the works already).

Unfortunatley, I think we probably need more parties towards the center to give the majority of voters the choice we're looking for. Even on this forum, many people are merely a swath of degrees of left of center, right of center, on the fence post, alittle more than right of center and the odd wacko for texture and flavour.

I agree with you that most political parties in Canada have generally found electoral success by moving towards the perceived “center” The Federal Liberals were indeed the “natural” governing party of Canada for this very reason. As it is often said that elections are lost and not won indeed the Liberals own arrogance and corruption gave rise to the Conservative’s increased popularity.

Since becoming elected indeed Harper has abandoned many core Conservative traditional values and moved far more towards the “center” on many issues. However I believe he has also done so wisely and still remains to the right on issues such as criminal justice. The Federal Liberals have not yet seemed to figure out that Canada is indeed tired of criminals in this country getting more rights than their victims do.
As a true testament to Harpers success I even know B.C. NDP’ers that actually vote Conservative in Federal elections. That is quite an achievement on Harpers part. There is certainly a democratic deficit in Canada but on the same theme there is also voter apathy. The questions remains would more democratic choice bring out more voters? I am not certain that it would.

Part of the problem is that Canadian’s are by and large ignorant as to how their government truly works and unfortunately politicians routinely capitalize and exploit this ignorance to their own advantage. Look no further than recent “Prorogue” issue as prime evidence of that. I don’t know that this trend will change because by and large it continues to work. Look no further than the Obama for evidence of that.

[steven lloyd]

Right Wingers typically understand that relationship and need to earn a financial return whereas the leftist simply sees it is greed.

That's excellent ! Are there any posters here who think they could come up with a better example of lazy thinking and stereotypical rhetoric ?

[Homeownertoo]

Right Wingers typically understand that relationship and need to earn a financial return whereas the leftist simply sees it is greed.

That's excellent ! Are there any posters here who think they could come up with a better example of lazy thinking and stereotypical rhetoric ?

In the context of Al's entire posting, I would say he nailed it pretty good, though I'd amend the specific quote to make it bombproof by saying "the typical leftist activist ..."

[johnp3]

Well it seems you have everything all figured out, I have a question for you we had the tree farm licences where and every body was making money from our resources, in the 70's, now what is happening? Why is it that the right wing is always the purveyors of morality, but when a policy of theirs is proven to be wrong, they blame everyone else. Then run and hide there money, and get the government to pay for their mistakes. Then they preach about not affording something because it will up the deficit. The Indian residential schools. are a prime example, Harper has set up a truth commission and I give him a lot of credit for that. What I see is the right sees a Government program, as a way to take money away from an area, and make someone rich. The left sees a government program as a way to spread the money, evenly throughout the community. Why does everything have to boil down to just one guy getting rich and everyone else being poor. We live in a very rich resource filled province, and we have huge poverty, children going hungry. Then the same group that puts up with these things, and justifies it with catch phrases and then they preach about being the protectors of morality. You guys should go to a school and help serve some kids a warm meal then tell them how it is better if one guy has a mansion, than they eat

[Glacier]

How does your friend rationalize supporting a political party that will most likely never support any campaign to criminalize abortion? Does this person figure that the good from other policies that the NDP supports is more paramount than the one issue of abortion? I'm rather curious about that.

He is an ardent socialist, so he finds the likes of Campbell and Harper scary. Most people don't vote based on one issue, and if they do, it probably won't be abortion. Especially when you have MPs of all parties on both sides of the divide. In my friend's case, he feels the NDP will save more lives because they protect the weak, students, and the downtrodden in society.

Like most rational people he realizes the chances abortion being illegal is practically zero. Also, it should be pointed out that Bill Vander Zalm destroyed the Social Credit party in part by making abortion a big issue.

I'm rather curious how a left-wing libertarian looks at things as well... I'll have to ask Whatthe about this...

I have spent a bit of time looking around at libertarians on the Internet, and it seems it depends on who you ask as to where they sit on the political spectrum. It really depends on how you define left and right (which are not synonymous with liberal and conservative). Some systems use two axis system with left and right represented horizontally, and authoritarian and libertarian represented vertically. Using this technique a libertarian could fall anywhere on the political spectrum.

I think it is fair to say that WhatThe and Grammafreddy quite libertarian, but when it comes to a lot of the social justice issues, they are far apart. ie. People often typify WhatThe as a bleeding heart and grammafreddy as more the opposite.

Here is an interesting read: http://www.la-articles.org.uk/pc.htm

[Al Czervic]

Right Wingers typically understand that relationship and need to earn a financial return whereas the leftist simply sees it is greed.

That's excellent ! Are there any posters here who think they could come up with a better example of lazy thinking and stereotypical rhetoric ?

Your right. I missed that “creative” thinking part of my post where I labelled everyone as a corrupt criminal in the Campbell Government multiple times. That was very "lazy of me.