[kimmy]

Trial-and-Error, on Mar 4 2005, 06:28 PM, said:

Chretien is a bonafide Canuck and a Liberal--albeit one with a seeming penchant for feathering the nest as it were.  Thus we must afford him protection as a matter of course. 

so... he might be a scumbag, but he's OUR scumbag, so you'll defend him regardless of his long and tawdry history?

Trial-and-Error, on Mar 4 2005, 06:28 PM, said:

Harper on the other hand is a known wannabe card-carrying American determined to fashion us after the Bush neocons.  Thus he deserves our derision.

In other words, you have no problem with the jeering of politicians... as long as it's politicians you don't like.

Trial-and-Error, on Mar 4 2005, 06:28 PM, said:

And Junior -WELL!!  By his own actions he advertises himself as a voracious bottom feeder.

...and Chretien isn't?

Trial-and-Error, on Mar 4 2005, 06:28 PM, said:

Besides I don't think it was the word "scumbag" so much as it was the way you phrased it--suggesting that not only do you think of him as a scumbag but worse--that he's a French scumbag with a speech impediment.

-French? Check.
-Scumbag? Check.
-Speech impediment? Check.
I don't get it. Where's the problem?



-kimmy

[Fortunata]

Chretien did some things right. He balanced budgets and paid down the debt. He had enough guts to keep us out of Iraq. And he did have the passion for Canada to work to keep this country together, misguided (and ultimately wrong) as the means ended up being.

However, BIG however, he WAS the PM, and as such, the buck stops on his desk. Doesn't matter if he didn't personally benefit, doesn't even matter if he gave the word to "scam", he is ultimately responsible.

[kimmy]

What about the "Shawinigan handshake" incident where he left the safety of his RCMP escort to choke a protester?
What about ordering his personal security detatchment to pepper-spray protesters?
What about feigning ignorance about the pepper-spraying of the protesters?
What about joking about the pepper-spraying of the protesters?
What about using his personal influence to strong-arm people in the BDC (the "Shawinigate" scandal?)
What about using his personal influence to expedite the parole of his son, serial criminal Michel Chretien?

That seems like a pretty good start on "tawdry" to me.


-kimmy

[kimmy]

eureka, on Mar 5 2005, 10:48 AM, said:

Mostly trivial, Kimmy. And the personal influence has been exaggerated and not proven to be what you are saying.

History records that Ty Cobb was a legendary baseball player, but also a scumbag.

Whether history will record that Chretien was a legendary PM, or great, good, mediocre, or poor, will remain to be seen. You obviously have a high opinion of his accomplishments in office; I am less enthusiastic. But however history grades Prime Minister Jean Chretien, we've seen enough of him to form opinions about Human Being Jean Chretien.

Ty Cobb's heroics on the ball-field may have encouraged baseball fans, or at least Detroit Tiger partisans, to overlook his shortcomings as a human being. Likewise, Chretien's alleged accomplishments as Prime Minister may persuade avid nationalists, or at least Liberal partisans, to gloss over his shortcomings. I choose not to, though I'm neither an avid nationalist nor a Liberal partisan.

I stand by "scumbag". It's a character description at least as well-supported, and maybe better-supported, as the character-attacks that are *routinely* leveled against Harper or Campbell or Klein or Bush or any other left-wing target-du-jour on this forum that pass without comment by either the administration or most forum members.



-kimmy

[ticker]

kimmy, on Mar 5 2005, 01:52 PM, said:

I stand by "scumbag". It's a character description at least as well-supported, and maybe better-supported, as the character-attacks that are *routinely* leveled against Harper or Campbell or Klein or Bush or any other left-wing target-du-jour on this forum that pass without comment by either the administration or most forum members.



-kimmy

That sums it up. Harper gets called everything under the sun and also other right leaning politicians.... but how dare you have the gull to say something bad about a liberal leader.

Left leaning bias favoritism.... Nah it couldn't be.

The editor wouldn't be on your case if it were Harper you were attaching a label to.

[ticker]

If mulroney was given a starting point of a 11 billion debt and the low interest rates of the 70s he could not compete with trudeau when it comes to raising is 10 fold.

[Trial-and-Error]

Chretien is a bonafide Canuck and a Liberal--albeit one with a seeming penchant for feathering the nest as it were. Thus we must afford him protection as a matter of course.

Harper on the other hand is a known wannabe card-carrying American determined to fashion us after the Bush neocons. Thus he deserves our derision.

And Junior -WELL!! By his own actions he advertises himself as a voracious bottom feeder. Thus we shall give him hell!

kimmy, kimmy, kimmy, how the dickens are you tonight?

Thanks for your response to the above post, albeit soooo serious. Why I should be miffed! Seems you just don't appreciate my sense of play. Not to worry, cuz I do!

Still, don't park your sense of humour when you sign in here? Next time, bring it with you.