(no subject)
Feb. 5th, 2008 08:06 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
felis_ultharusYeah, I'll admit it. I'm keeping track of the American primaries today. I'm a political junky, and it's been too long (much too long) since a Canadian federal election.
I know US gay activists had their hopes pinned on Gravel, who's the only candidate in the Democratic race who'd register on the left in Canada -- pro-same-sex marriage, wanting to end the Iraq war in 120 days, wanting to bring in a solid carbon tax to curb pollution. Of the two front-runners, Obama's policies are somewhat farther to the left over Clinton's.
Still, I doubt an Obama presidency would push the US much farther in the right direction. The problems run too deep, too far into the deep psyche of the country. He's not radical enough, and every change he did make would be fought tooth-and-nail by vested corporate and religious interests.
Would be nice if our neighbours started moving over to universal health care, though, since it'd take the wind out of the sails of Canada's increasingly-powerful anti-medicare movement.
Meanwhile, in Canadian news, ex-prime minister Mulroney's chief of staff spent some time giving a glimpse of depths of his ex-boss's corruption today. Which means it was a slow news day, because everyone's known that Mulroney's a slime for a few decades now.
Unfortunately, everyone who cares that some of the most radical, right-wing policy changes in the country were initiated by bribery already knew that, and the anti-corruption legislation designed to fight that wasn't law back then so we can't charge the bastard. I just wish people would stop voting for a conservative leader who gets advice from the man, and wants to bring those policies to a new and much-worse level.
I know US gay activists had their hopes pinned on Gravel, who's the only candidate in the Democratic race who'd register on the left in Canada -- pro-same-sex marriage, wanting to end the Iraq war in 120 days, wanting to bring in a solid carbon tax to curb pollution. Of the two front-runners, Obama's policies are somewhat farther to the left over Clinton's.
Still, I doubt an Obama presidency would push the US much farther in the right direction. The problems run too deep, too far into the deep psyche of the country. He's not radical enough, and every change he did make would be fought tooth-and-nail by vested corporate and religious interests.
Would be nice if our neighbours started moving over to universal health care, though, since it'd take the wind out of the sails of Canada's increasingly-powerful anti-medicare movement.
Meanwhile, in Canadian news, ex-prime minister Mulroney's chief of staff spent some time giving a glimpse of depths of his ex-boss's corruption today. Which means it was a slow news day, because everyone's known that Mulroney's a slime for a few decades now.
Unfortunately, everyone who cares that some of the most radical, right-wing policy changes in the country were initiated by bribery already knew that, and the anti-corruption legislation designed to fight that wasn't law back then so we can't charge the bastard. I just wish people would stop voting for a conservative leader who gets advice from the man, and wants to bring those policies to a new and much-worse level.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-02-06 02:35 am (UTC)HERE is a piece of news for ya: LIFE will kill you. Christ, take off the water-wings, Scaredy-Squirrel.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-02-06 05:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-02-06 02:52 am (UTC)everyone's known that Mulroney's a slime for a few decades now
Everyone except that customer I had who still believes these are just rumors...
(no subject)
Date: 2008-02-06 05:38 pm (UTC)Thing that it took me awhile to understand was the idea of "pledged" and "unpledged" delegate, but I think I understand now. Pledged delegates seem to be the ones who actually decide in the months before the final vote, while unpledged ones have just responded to a poll and could change their mind.
As for Mulroney, he's admitted he took the money, now, though he's repeatedly pointed out it wasn't technically illegal then. But I doubt that'll do much for a person who wants to believe in him.
Even his ex-ally Norman Specter was going on at length about the ins and outs of Mulroney's motives and psychology. Again, he didn't implicate Mulroney in any crimes, but much of it was pretty nasty stuff.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-02-06 07:20 pm (UTC)I read on the process yesterday and while I have a better idea of how the whole thing works, it's still pretty confusing.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-02-06 04:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-02-06 05:38 pm (UTC)