Buckdog

Ezra also conveniently ignores the fact that the man he supported for Alberta premier also holds dual citizenship. I guess for Ezra it's only a problem if you're not a rabid right wingnut.

Ezra is merely demonstrating that he is fundamentally a racist at heart.

Apparently in his mind, there are two classes of Canadian - his kind and all the wrong ones.

Reading Ezra's right up there with Paul Jackson and Michael Coren - asshats all.

Didn't Layton and Pat Martin agree with Ezra?

Wellllll ... Rob. Here is a snippet from a December 8th Canadian Press news item:
"But Ezra Levant, a longtime conservative pundit and publisher of the Western Standard, criticized Dion in a Calgary Sun column. When it comes to making decisions about the war on terror, and Canada's role in Afghanistan, will Dion be unduly influenced by France, a country that has taken up the role of lawyer and arms dealer for every terrorist state in the world, even defending Saddam Hussein until the eve of his overthrow?" Levant wrote. NDP Leader Jack Layton was not as critical, but said it would probably be a better idea to maintain one citizenship. I would prefer that a leader of a party hold only Canadian citizenship, because one represents many Canadians, and for me that means that it's better to remain the citizen of one country," Layton said. "
----
Now I started this article off by saying that I am a dipper and I think what Ezra is doing to Dion is mean spirited - so... what is your point...?

I am defending Dion in this post.. ...you come to my site and try to make the issue 'Layton'?

What is that all about .... pal???

It's beyond the pale to point out the truth?

Sorry Bud, that doesn't wash.

If your original post had said something about how ridiculous Layton and Martin was being about the issue, I wouldn't have said anything.

But since the NDP'er sites that I've seen opine on this generally just say "Levant is a douchebag on this one" without mentioning Layton or Pat Martin, I felt the need to point it out. I don't know if you don't know or you don't care, or if you just refuse to criticise the NDP, but it seems strange not to mention it.

Sorry to tell the truth on your site. I didn't realize that it was an NDP criticism free zone.

;-)

No ... it's called 'looking a gift horse in the mouth' and showing some class when bi-partisanship is demonstrated.

Mr. "RobEdger":

Canada does not have "two tier" citizenship. There is nothing in our laws that makes someone who holds dual citizenship, or is an immigrant to Canada, a lesser citizen.

Dion was born and raised in Canada, and did some of his graduate work in France. Big, fat, hairy deal.

Ezra is doing nothing more than propagating a bogus talking point, and one that is insulting to any Canadian whose parents or grandparents immigrated here.

Ezra is raising the bogeyman of "french influence" over a politician, when we have a Prime Minister who is so far up GWB's arse it's not even funny. If he is "worried" about foreign influences in Canadian Politics, perhaps he better look a little closer to his own pet party.

Ummm... thanks for the lesson Grog.

I don't agree with Ezra Levant.

What gave you the impression that I did?

And leftdog... so your blog is just an NDP criticism when you say something nice about a Liberal?

C'mon. If you think Levant is being ridiculous, it shouldn't matter what party you belong to, just say it. You aren't doing anyone a favour, you're just stating your opinion.

And the logical conclusion of your opinion must be that you think Pat Martin is ridiculous too.

Say it!! Say it!!!!!

;-)

Robert - I would recommend that you not consider a career in the foreign service as your diplocmacy skills are wanting.

A key to political maturity involves understanding golden rules of politics such as, 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' - you are breaking that rule in spades.

Instead of allowing me to make a statement in support of your Liberal leader AND at least registering that I am attacking your enemy (Ezra) you have come to my site and demanded that I attack the leader of my party.

I find that to be the style of politics that I usually expect from right wingers.

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Sez RobEdger:
What gave you the impression that I did?

The usual off-topic linking of unrelated issues - namely this phrase:

"Levant is a douchebag on this one" without mentioning Layton or Pat Martin, I felt the need to point it out

Which is the usual absolutist tactic I see coming from people trying to defend halfwits like Levant. It's the classic tactic of "You believe in X, therefore you MUST agree with Y" - when Y is, optimistically, described as "loosely related".

For example, "If you support gay marriage, then you must want to legalize pedophilia as well"

Where Martin and Layton are concerned, I think they stepped right into the steaming turd of a CPoC talking point in the name of a "cheap political point" - one which sadly will garner them no votes - because it's only in a province like Alberta that Levant's dribblings carry any weight.

I'm far more pissed off with Levant who has now published not one, but two columns on the subject, and as usual is inventing issues.

I agree with you on every point. Ezra is the bad guy here - I resent Libs trying to make Layton / Martin the focus of this whole issue.

I guess the point is this: I expect Levant to say and think these outrageous things, because he is a rightwing extremist.

I think much more highly of Layton than I do of Levant, which is why I was surprised that he was singing the same tune.

I have higher standards from the leader of the NDP - the party of Ed Broadbent, the party that bills itself as the social conscience of federal politics - than I do of Levant.

I'm actually not as pissed off at Levant, because I expect that kind of ridiculous stuff from him. I expect more from Layton.

When members of the party that I belong to do or say ridiculous stuff I call them on it. If I were running down the Iraq war, and you popped by to mention Ignatieff's support for it, I wouldn't be ticked off that you brought it up. Give me a break.

We're not doing diplomacy here. It's supposed to be open and honest discourse.

Well, at least on my blog.

It seems to me that you simply want to get a shot in at Jack for totally partisan reasons. He stated a preference - you've tried to turn that into an 'attack' on Dion that was as bad or worse than Ezra's attack. I don't agree.