October 06, 2004

• apologies for the 2nd post in a day - I just got all worked up about this slap in the face of democracy . . .
• America's a democracy? No one told me.
• Ha! Yeah. Agreed, on all points, pete_best, but I'm getting the feeling we should avoid posting too much main news stuff on Monkeyfilter, as I think it may go against tracicle's manifesto for the site. It's starting to get Newsfilterish and just look at the blue right now, it's kinda getting .. not very entertaining. Then again, this shit may be just important enough that we should shout it from the blogtops. I don't know, what do other Monkeys think?
• What is this democracy you speak of?
• Why not just suspend the constitution and have done with it? I'm pretty sure that's being taken under consideration.
• There's a Constitution now?
• Startlingly, yes. You may have missed it because no one really pays much attention to it, kinda like that elderly relative you have that starts ranting about the Kaiser at family dinners.
• Damn, I announced a significant speech myself and it only got picked up by the Golf channel.
• We've got to take Uncle Rufus out of the basement more often; I want to hear about this "democracy" and Constitution thing.
• Nice find, pete_best. I can't wait till this administration's gone; I'm tired of the daily dose of outrage.
• It'd be nice if we could keep to a few dedicated USElectionFilter threads. Personally, I think stuff like this is important enough to be shouted from the rooftops, but then I'd bet that there are more than a few non-Murrcan monkeys who are tired of seeing all this on the front page. Could we agree to stick to limited threads, do you think? One for debates, one for why we think Bush is evil/Kerry is a douchebag, one for the flaccid media coverage, one for Diebold, etc? I honestly don't know. But if we could, I bet that would be appreciated by more than a few here.
• And good link, p_b, thanks.
• If this was any other election I'd say minimal political threads......but this is one of the most historical presidential elections in U.S. history. And it greatly affects the kind of relationship we will have with the rest of the world. IMO, shout as loud as you possibly can until it's over. Perhaps a warning; U.S. Political Thread (USPT) can be put on the front of any such post for those who are completely uninterested. If we don't have these discussions here, I will go somewhere else for them. I'd rather have them here. It's kinda nice having political debates with those who's opinions you are somewhat familiar with and who you can trust to generally have the ability to maintain strong dialogue without going postal. This is so serious, we must be able to vent in a community that is somewhat familiar.
• What Darshon said.
• Point taken Nosy, MCT - I just couldn't figure out which thread it would fit in and still garner some posts. H-dogg does a fantastic job with keeping the threads alive and moving, but sometimes the articles don't impact like (I think) they should. I just didn't think this fit in the "Bush: Dumb?" or one of the debate threads - as far as I know there's not a strictly campaign one. Of course I yeild to whatever Her Bashiness thinks either way. *swerves on-topic* point being, this latest Rovent truly flies in the face of campaign law and / or ethics (I know, accuse them of being unethical??). I would like to know what the limits are of the Prez jerking the media around for specific campaign speeches. I understand Kerry calls the press to "significant" speeches all the time that are usually normal stump speeches, but he's not the President yet. He can call all he wants, no news network is going to carry the whole thing live just because he says it's "significant". The President is bound (or should be) by a different set of acceptable behaviors and whether or not this is illegal, it's sickening. They ought to be damned ashamed . . now.
• This is exactly the kind of thing Kerry can call Bush on during the next debate and watch him respond in his usual dim-witted fashion.
• How about having one post each day that says, "This is the daily US election thread. Please post all interesting election-related links inside"? That gives people who want Newsfilter a place to get it, and those who aren't in the mood for it an easy way of skipping it.
• Please, for the love of God, don't turn MoFi into MeFi with it's constant post criticisms. If the subject of the post doesn't interest you, move along. What is truly annoying is reading comments that comment on something other than the post. The whole cluttered frontpage argument is silly, just keep on scrollin monkeys; and yes I know this comment fits the non thread related criteria I hate but it had to be said.
• Not a post criticism. Nos and I both thanked p_b for the post, both acknowledged that it's important stuff. We're just discussing a question of etiquette, that's all. Trying to be considerate of those who don't live on this side of the pond.
• Etiquette, schmettiquette, if you're not interested in the post don't read or comment on it. Is that not considerate enough? I realise that some folks are sick of these kinds of posts/topics but it's important to a lot of people so let those people have at it (it will be over in a month or so anyway) and the disinterested can just scroll a smidge further. MoFi has always seemed a tad more relaxed on the post nazis, it would be a shame for that to change. Don't make me set the clowns on you...
• You know, I don't mind the ElectionFilter all that much, in large part because I like American politics, but I wonder how some of the American posters would feel if this place were to focus on, say, Canadian politics to the extent it focuses on American politics right now. As for the 'clutter' argument, zeoslap, you can just scroll past the spam in your indox, can't you? I can see how people might feel it's analogous to the constant 'merikan posts. It's nice that people are interested in the direction their country is heading, but the US isn't the world, and I think Americans sometimes overestimate their importance in it. I don't think we should get into call-out mode or anything, just a little consideration before posting an FPP is all. (I don't mean to suggest that this FPP was bad, though).
• ... but I wonder how some of the American posters would feel if this place were to focus on, say, Canadian politics to the extent it focuses on American politics right now. Better educated, that's how. Not an anti-US snark, I mean I'd feel better educated about the world. I'm ashamed to admit that I know next to squat about Canadian politics (or those of most other foreign countries, for that matter).
• Let's just say that if there was something similar to Mofi/Mefi that dealt with international politics, it would be on my rss reader in a heartbeat.
• I would love it if world politics came into play more often. Not in a generalized way but specifics, ie; UK elections, OZ elections (which we've had a little bit of), European politics, etc. Like mct said, we'd all be better for the knowledge of what goes on in other nations as observed through our fellow monkeys eyes. So there.
• You asked for it: Canadian Minority Government Faces Possible Collapse Today.
• See? I had no idea. I'm an idiot. But now I'm a little less of an idiot. Not to hijack, but could rocket or someone point me to some good links re: the history behind the Quebec-related conflicts? That's something I'm curious about.
• rocket88 - my first reaction, is "oh my god!" My second was, dammit, I need to read Canadian news - or any news not on mofi - more often. But I'm still confused - so the Bloc added an amedment to the frickin' THONE SPEECH?! The new parliament hasn't even gotten down to doing stuff, and the other parties are trying to tear it down. A Bloc/Conservative alliance sounds like it would be hell. Right/left politics aside, both of those parties want to tear away at cohesion in the Canadian government, send the provinces off on their own merry ways. Of course, that would suit Alberta and Ontario just fine - would Quebec really come out ahead? I don't know - but dammit, you don't go tearing up a system that works, wreaking something good. Federalism in Canada means that the whole country works together, for the benefit of all the regions, as it ought to. We only have 30 million people - we don't need to make ourselves weaker by splitting up.
• I enjoy watching the BBC news in the US when I can, because not only do they generally do a better job of reporting on US politics and news, but they include things about countries other than the UK as well. I think there may have been a time in the Cronkite era US when US news programs also covered other countries' politics, but that kind of well-roundedness has sadly been sacrificed to the Scott Petersen trial and whether eating mercury can help you lose weight. That's why I love the internet.
• mct: CBC indepth is good - October Crisis (1970), Unity debate. Jean Chretien's farewell speech touches on some of the issues, from a distinct federalist bias, of course. It isn't just Quebec separatism - the west has been grumbling too. They fell ignored by rich and powerful Ontario, powerful and whiny Quebec - but who do they take it out on? The small, struggling Maritimes. I have no sympathy for Western complaints when they keep making snide comments about the provinces that have gotten the worst deal out of Confederation, and still don't complain.
• Couldn't disagree more, jb. The Conservatives don't want to split up the country. They represent the strong desire in Western Canada to be a part of the way the country is governed. If the Liberals don't wanna play ball with the whole country, then why should they be allowed to govern it? They simply don't have the mandate to govern the way they did as a majority. Martin better get used to it. Also, your assertion that Canadian federalism works well is simply not in line with majority opinion west of Ontario, and that kind of everything-is-fine mentality is yet another reason so many Western Canadians dislike Ontarians so much. I've heard Ontario compared to the US in terms of how often its people consider the opinions of its neighbors, and although the perception may be mistaken, I understand why people feel that way. Ridiculous legislation like the national gun registry makes a lot of people very angry. The perception, out here, that the feds don't care too much about, say, Saskatchewan farmers or the lumber industry in British Columbia isn't something that'll just go away. Add to that the pork funneled into Quebec and Ontario (not the West) over the last several years and, yeah, some of us tend to get a little testy about it. I'm not sure where you get that bit about the Maritimes, except maybe Harper's comments eariler this year. Anyway, I think there's a strong case to be made that a couple of the Maritime provinces have, if not the best, a very good deal in Confederation, at least in terms of their clout in the federal government, but that's another story.
• We've been spared another election, for now. I think it was just a case of political posturing as the various factions put up their dukes for what will undoubtetly be a very scrappy and nasty session of parliament. Another election would be hugely un-popular right now and the parties' war chests are empty. While a minority government may help to keep the bastards honest, it also means that any productive legislation will be hard to come by.
• You know, I don't mind the ElectionFilter all that much, in large part because I like American politics, but I wonder how some of the American posters would feel if this place were to focus on, say, Canadian politics to the extent it focuses on American politics right now. I've been looking for a way to broach this subject as a FPP, actually. Please do! The only way for a Murkin like me to get an understanding of the rest of the world is by non-Murkin's not remaining so closed-mouth about their own universe. I'm so jealous of the fact of you non-Murkins that know so much about my politics, and I want the opportunity know yours just as intimately. There's lots complaints about US-centric MoFi. For some reason, people think the answer is to hide everyone's nationality, instead of provide more cross-national links. Diversity is good. Now I'm going to go back and read the Canada stuff more thoroughly. Hopefully more stuff like this starts ending up on the main page.
• Mr. Knickerbocker, as a U.S.-born middle-aged man now living in Canada, I think I understand a little about why you (and others) might consider those in foreign countries to be closed-mouthed regarding their countries (and their politics in particular). For one, most of the people I've met here consider internal politics to be a topic discussed primarily (in fact, almost exclusively) by informed citizens of Canada. International politics are obviously quite different, but internally, what people in other countries want to know is available with some self-education. To project the issues of a nation's internal politics is somewhat rude, like whipping out the baby pictures on a bus, uninvited, with a stranger. It's glaringly evident that people in the U.S. have a bizarre fetish for expecting other nations and their citizens to care about U.S.-based issues. Yet, when criticism or not entirely enthusiastic commentary is offered, the opinions of the 'interfering foreigners' are histrionically rejected.
• Oh, I forgot something: Step 1: Impeachment. Step 2: Trial for war crimes. Step 3: Execution. That's what these bastards deserve.
• Let's just say that if there was something similar to Mofi/Mefi that dealt with international politics, it would be on my rss reader in a heartbeat. A subscription to The Economist?
• Smo - I understand being ignored at Ontario and feeling like you aren't being listened to.* Ontario is big and populous, and will always have power in the legislature. Even if it's still disproportionate - all of the western provinces have more MPs per person than Ontario. Western votes go much farther - the individual westerner has more say over our government than anyone voting in Quebec or Ontario. (As for whether gun registry is "ridiculous", it seems to me that the last major school shooting was in rural Alberta. It could have been written better, but the resistence to it is blindly ideological, and funded by American interests). There are a lot of serious issues all over the country - farming everywhere (you could say that for the planet), Alberta beef, Softwood lumber. I was in B.C. a few years ago, I think about the same time as the ferries and cruise boats in Prince Rupert were blockaded. But what I get angry at is the attitude not to the Centre, but to the East. I don't know if you've been down there or not, but if anyone in this country wants to complain about being hard done by (after natives and the North), it's Atlantic Canada. Fishing isn't just struggling, it's collapsed completely. Coal in Cape Breton is dead. Already two generations have been bleeding away from the place - west to Ontario, and farther. They've been making logging work (actually sustainable too) in Nova Scotia, but they can't compete with the huge clear cuts of BC. But just at the time when we should be sticking together as a country, and trying to figure out how to bring back the economy of the east, we have the Albertan premiere acting as if he personally created the oil that has made his province rich. It's pure geologic luck, but Ralph Klein wants to act like it's all his doing. But who sends him hay when there's a drought? Ontario, Quebec - and those same Maritime provinces he dissed. See, in eastern Canada, they have this tradition of helping out people in need. It's just the way they do things there. *I'm very disapointed that you would extend it to "Ontarioans" - I personally try to seperate my feelings about a place and government from the individual people, because they can't help that they come from a bigger place.
• Smo - I understand being ignored at Ontario and feeling like you aren't being listened to.* Ontario is big and populous, and will always have power in the legislature. Even if it's still disproportionate - all of the western provinces have more MPs per person than Ontario. Western votes go much farther - the individual westerner has more say over our government than anyone voting in Quebec or Ontario. (As for whether gun registry is "ridiculous", it seems to me that the last major school shooting was in rural Alberta. It could have been written better, but the resistence to it is blindly ideological, and funded by American interests). There are a lot of serious issues all over the country - farming everywhere (you could say that for the planet), Alberta beef, Softwood lumber. I was in B.C. a few years ago, I think about the same time as the ferries and cruise boats in Prince Rupert were blockaded. But what I get angry at is the attitude not to the Centre, but to the East. I don't know if you've been down there or not, but if anyone in this country wants to complain about being hard done by (after natives and the North), it's Atlantic Canada. Fishing isn't just struggling, it's collapsed completely. Coal in Cape Breton is dead. Already two generations have been bleeding away from the place - west to Ontario, and farther. They've been making logging work (actually sustainable too) in Nova Scotia, but they can't compete with the huge clear cuts of BC. But just at the time when we should be sticking together as a country, and trying to figure out how to bring back the economy of the east, we have the Albertan premiere acting as if he personally created the oil that has made his province rich. It's pure geologic luck, but Ralph Klein wants to act like it's all his doing. But who sends him hay when there's a drought? Ontario, Quebec - and those same Maritime provinces he dissed. See, in eastern Canada, they have this tradition of helping out people in need. It's just the way they do things there. *I'm very disapointed that you would extend it to "Ontarioans" - I personally try to seperate my feelings about a place and government from the individual people, because they can't help that they come from a bigger place.