Friday, January 07, 2005


One good thing about the Blog Awards (our campaign motto here: "Vote CalgaryGrit - as a Calgary Liberal he never wins anything!") going on right now is that it gives people a chance to get a look at some blogs they might have been oblivious to in the past. So I decided to glance through the Conservative blogs nominated and see what the right in Canada is saying. Here's a sample:

Brock: On the Attack
Brock rips Martin to pieces over his lack of vision and leadership. No complaints by me on that. I do disagree with his conclusion that Harper needs to abandon his moderate persona and show some strong leadership of the small c conservative vision. The only way Harper wins is if he's moderate - saying otherwise, is like saying Jack Layton can win by championing a far left agenda forcefully. Harper can still show vision and leadership, but it has to be vision of a centrist Canada or else he'll never leave Stornaway. Diefenbaker ended 22 years of Liberal domination by running to the left of the Liberals and even Mulroney, to a certain extent, wasn't any farther right than Turner (at the start). The problem with the right-wing ideologues is they often fail to realize that Canada is a small l liberal country. Just as the Democrats have to shift right to win in the States, the Conservatives have to shift left to win in Canada.

Andrew Coyne
Weighs in on the fall of the Berlin Wall and Brian Mulroney's re-election chances. (Put it this way, it's been a while since he's updated his blog)

Jay Currie
Defends CHOI-FM. Is it just me or does anyone find it odd that the right in the United States is aghast at 2 seconds of Janet Jackson's nipple being shown during the Super Bowl but the right in Canada defends a radio station's right to repeatedly make off-colour, offensive, and tasteless jokes? Personally, I have mixed feelings on CHOI so I won't take a strong stand one way or the other, but it does strike me as odd.

Bound by Gravity
Questions Global Warming. Yes, there are natural cycles but never in the earth's history has there been a rise in a short period (say, 100 years) as we're seeing right now. Maybe it's I Love Lucy reruns or Major League Baseball games that cause global warming, but it's definitely something man-made and the "natural" warming and cooling periods arguments doesn't jive with that.

Links to his wife's incredible self-righteous post about abortion. It's a long post and very passionate so it's probably worth reading, even if it's completely off-base. I don't have enough time to get into a full fledged abortion debate now but will likely come back to it later if by some miracle there are some slow weeks in the bold and aggressive Martin legislative agenda.

In a site called "spin killer", we ironically see articles defending the war in Iraq and William Watson lashing out at Canada in this beauty of a paragraph:
"The Canadian way." It almost makes you want to throw up. The Canadian way, indeed. Never miss an opportunity for self-praise. Never pass up a chance to raise our own fragile self-esteem. Never fail to remind the world what wonderful people we are.

Blue Cicada
Calls Watson's aforementioned prose "inspired". I hope I missed the sarcasm and he wasn't serious. If anything Canadians are extremely insecure and there has been huge criticism of our speed to and amount of aid to the Tsunami relief. I'm no fan of Martin's, but I think he's handled this situation fairly well so far.


  • It's "Bound by Gravity", not "Bounds ..." =)

    I think the graph I have imbedded in my post shows an almost equal raise in temperature during the middle ages. Please provide statistic data if you're going to dispute the statistic data I put forward.

    Thanks for the link. =)

    By Blogger Andrew, at 1:24 p.m.  

  • Aaaah...wading through the swamp, eh, CG? With exception of Andrew, who is not yet fully turned to the darkside, those were pretty grim places to visit. NorthwesternWind is a particular puzzle to me. Curt is clearly a smart fellow with a deep Catholic faith, yet he approvingly links to David Horowitz and Ann Coulter, two of the right's most vile hatemongers. It's strange. Congratulations on making it out sane.

    By Blogger Timmy the G, at 10:03 p.m.  

  • Andrew; I actually like your blog for the most part...and I'd much rather see someone use scientific evidence to argue against global warming than see someone quote bible verses to argue against gay marriage. (although I only stumbled across your blog recently so maybe that is a hobby of yours too)

    Yes, the graph you posted there would support your theory, but it doesn't seem to go up to the year 2000. And I think global temperatures have risen by 2 or 3 degrees Celsius this century, which would be dramatic compared to the half a degree over three hundred years in medieval times.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 1:14 a.m.  

  • Timmy! Re: Coulter. I couldn't be so simple as getting the joke, could it? She alternates quickly between bon mots, hyperbole and more normal commentary. Styen does the same, but with somewhat less exageration. Lighten up guys, they're just taking a stick to 'holy' liberal pinatas. If you don't like it, you should simply recognize you're being baited and just move on.I'm still waiting on the Horowitz stuff.

    By Blogger Curt, at 2:37 a.m.  

  • "The wife" has responded to your assessment of my post; you're welcome to visit my site and hear my side. It would have been easier to respond to you had there been an actual explanation for your views in your post; appreciate the link, don't appreciate being called self-righteous. The off-base part I can't do a thing about - we're likely coming from very different points on the spectrum and the best I can personally expect is to agree to disagree.

    By Blogger Rebecca, at 2:38 a.m.  

  • CG:

    The graph is so large scale it's hard to tell :/ If you can find recent global temperature averages I'd love to see them. Chuck a comment on my site and I'll see it for sure.

    re: NWW - Curt and I routinely debate religion and metaphysics. I may not be swayed by his religious objections to SSM, but I do respect the thought and analysis he puts in to them, and concede that he raises some very valid concerns. I think you're selling him a bit short.

    By Blogger Andrew, at 10:26 a.m.  

  • You said about blue cicada:

    ''Calls Watson's aforementioned prose "inspired". I hope I missed the sarcasm and he wasn't serious.''

    Do they teach reading comprehension in Calgary? The word I used was ''insipid'' and it applied to Martin, not Watson.


    By Blogger chip, at 1:27 p.m.  

  • Here's how the right in Canada and the US differ: they don't, really. They're both an amalgam of various different factions, just like the left.

    Some are moral/social conservatives. Those are the ones who went nuts over Janet Jackson and made themselves look very silly. Some are classical liberals/libertarians. They are the ones who got upset over CHOI. The latter group are sometimes called "South Park Republicans". (I count myself among them -- it does mean that the votes swing back and forth each election depending on which leader/party looks worse for freedom.)

    By Blogger The Tiger, at 6:31 p.m.  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home