Beyond The Commons

 Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

Leave a message at the beep

by Aaron Wherry on Wednesday, November 4, 2009 4:02pm - 30 Comments

David Sukuzi gives the Prime Minister a ring.

Tags: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
  • Foreigner

    Oh, the wingnuts won't like this post. "Go back to probing the bottoms of insects, Doctor Fruit-Fly" they'll scream.

  • TedTylerEzro

    I don't mind Dr. Suzuki being concerned about global warming. I do find it undermines his credibility if, like Mrs. May, he only gets deeply concerned about government inaction on the environment when it involves people who don't share a wider socially progressive agenda. His fire and brimstone rhetoric and stunts spiked suddenly when the conservatives got into power.

    Which is really quite a pity, given that environmentalism can be something that can pursued across partisan lines.

    • Foreigner

      "His fire and brimstone rhetoric and stunts spiked suddenly when the conservatives got into power. "

      Everyone's rhetoric ramped up when the troglodytes got into power.

      • TedTylerEzro

        You know, when you are nakedly partisan and demonize people, you largely just serve your enemies interests and cause rather than your own.

        We are still citizens who pay taxes, follow the law, and largely live peacefully like all the people you do approve of.

        • Foreigner

          "You know, when you are nakedly partisan and demonize people…"

          Demonize? You mean like calling your adversaries Taliban-huggers, terrorists, family-destroyers and pedophiles and making them targets of mutli-year attack campaigns, a lot of it paid with public funds? Or do you mean accusing someone of bad faith, such as David Susuki and Elizabeth May only being critical of people who don't share an (undefined) "socially-progressive agenda?"

          Let me know.

          • TedTylerEzro

            Hey, I'm not calling you a moonbat am I?

            And yes, I am accusing David Suzuki and Elizabeth May of having political views that aren't specifically environmentalist, that they intertwine with their environmentalism. That's not demonizing. If I call them eco-fascists and moonbats, that's demonizing.

            Also, if you hate what the other people have said, why not be the more reasonable and thus the more persuasive? It's crap like you mention that have ensured that the conservatives have been shut out of a majority for two elections, and out of government for the previous four elections. Why ape a losing strategy?

          • Foreigner

            "I am accusing David Suzuki and Elizabeth May of having political views that aren't specifically environmentalist."

            What else are they? In May's case, environmentalism is the basis of her politics, but in Susuki's case, I don't see anything much more than the concerns of an ecologist.

            Everyone behaves politically…it's the ethics and the intellectual honesty that should be of concern.

  • Dakota

    The eco-facists are back it, demanding more money be wasted on this farce.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

      You know, when you are nakedly partisan and demonize people, you largely just serve your enemies interests and cause rather than your own.

      TedTylerEzro was probably just too busy to post that in response to your comment so I've done it for him.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

    How come he has the time call the PM when he hasnt changed all the lightbulbs in my house yet…..slacker

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

      And just LOOK at all that Mother-Earth-killing detritus crammed into his office. Look, look, right there — the fifth through eighth pages of paper from the bottom of the pile closest to the phone — did those trees HAVE to die?

  • TedTylerEzro

    Thanks Robert. I actually do appreciate it.

  • TedTylerEzro

    I must admit, I am more easily offended by my ideological rivals.

    • Foreigner

      And I'm more offended by accusations of intellectual dishonesty and moral/ethical corruption than I am by simple name-calling.

      • TedTylerEzro

        Not intellectual dishonesty per say. Rather muddying one ethical position by joining it in common cause with other ethical positions.

        • Foreigner

          Could you be more specific? I'm not sure what ethical positions you have in mind here.

          • TedTylerEzro

            Well for example, I care passionately about abortion. If I ceased to care so passionately about abortion, and muted my protest of the government's complicity in abortion because the "my Tories" are in government even though they are just as pro-abortion rights as the Liberals, then I should certainly lose credibility. Likewise, if I didn't care about about abortion while my party was in power, but made a huge stink of it afterwards while my opponents are in power.

          • Foreigner

            Ah, I see.

  • knick

    Maybe it's time for a poll on climate change. Do Canadians care, or even know about Canada's 'official' position?

    • Foreigner

      How about a referendum: Is climate change real? Yes/No.

      That'll settle it.

      • TedTylerEzro

        Well of course climate change is real. No one is disputing past icehouse and greenhouse effects.

        What is in dispute is what role mankind is playing in current climate change due to the burning of fossil fuels, and what degree global climate will be affected by greenhouse gases contributed by those fossil fuel emissions.

        Mostly though, we disagree on who should make a severe lifestyle change and pay for the cleanup. I favour making it expensive for the coddled consumer class to drive and buy cheap crap, while the consumer classes generally favour forcing industry, small business and agriculture to take the hit.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

          I'm in favour of somebody else paying for it so I can keep on living my life. That's why I buy carbon offsets whenever I fly to environmental conferences.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

        How about a referendum

        Nah, lets just wait until the oceans begin to boil so we can throw conservative climate change deniers in. I can live with a much warmer world and nastier climate if it means I don't have to live with conservatives.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

          Boiling oceans, eh? Now there's a target…

  • Peter Jay

    Paperless office?

    Once Suzuki sells his second house and quits the rest of his carbon-guzzling ways, then I'll listen. Until then, it's total bunk.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

      Serious question: Would you really listen if Suzuki sold his second house and so on? Btw, my question doesn't mean that I personally endorse any or all of Suzuki's actions.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/c_9 c_9

      You're right, because of course nobody can have any opinion until they carry their own advice to a near-impossible extreme. Why, look at those who advocate that we cut back on sweets – they only eat celery, all day long!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    I missed the stunt: anything original, intelligent or amusing?

    (Hey, there's always a chance)

  • Joan Tintor

    No jumping the queue ahead of Yann Martel.

  • hosertohoosier

    Environmentalists dug their own grave when they went anti-nuclear back in the 70's. Though few plants have been built since then, the load capacity of the average nuclear reactor has quadrupled in that time. Imagine where we could be if governments had actually thrown money behind the nuclear option over the past 35 years. Instead environmentalists lobbied for a perfect world option – solar and wind are still not ready for prime time.

    Environmental change will be costly for Canada. Our biggest exports are cars, metals that we mine, forestry/pulp&paper, aerospace and oil & gas. All of these are either big polluters, or are industries that cause a lot of pollution (cars and planes). We can't fuel our industries without major investments in nuclear power. Is it a perfect option? No. But if anybody can store nuclear waste, surely it is our barren frigid land (okay the Russians probably have us beat). Does it require high up-front fixed costs? Yes. But the payoff is cheap and clean power (lowest cost per kilowatt hour) – and it plugs us into a technology that has (unlike wind) shown marked improvements over the past 35 years. Nuclear is the least worst option, but unfortunately environmentalists strive for perfect pipe dreams (and in many cases like the idea that people will suffer and sacrifice if they take power, as penance for their sins).

Previous

Next

From Macleans