Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Separatists Blame Marois to Hide Truth

Yesterday the Montreal Gazette published a Léger poll which showed that if an election were held today the PQ would form the next Quebec provincial government.

While one would assume that this would come as good news to separatists, a closer look indicates that they've got a lot to worry about.

The Parti Quebecois lead the Liberals 37% to 33%, a margin that is incredibly close considering how unpopular the Liberals are, if we are to believe the Press.

Amazingly, while Mr. Charest's personal popularity is at it's lowest historical level, the Liberals are trailing the PQ by a scant four percentage points.
It's hard to believe that the Liberals can sink any lower and if this is the bottom, it doesn't look so bad. Given the Liberal party's sad performance, the PQ should be sitting somewhere between 50% and 60%, but they are not. 

The PQ militant wing and a compliant 'Clique du Plateau' (my new favourite phrase to describe Quebec's separatist Press) have been selling the fiction that it is Madame Marois' personal unpopularity that is holding the PQ back. This is a fantasy.

The real reason that the race remains close is not because of Madame Marois' so-called unpopularity, but the Parti Quebecois militants' continued push for a referendum that is turning voters off.

While Marois realizes a referendum is a political drag extraordinaire and has tried to back away from it, the radicals, the same ones that torpedo almost every PQ leader,  continue to sell a pipe dream that voters are not willing to buy anymore.

To paraphrase a Bill Clinton election saying- "It's the referendum, stupid!"

And though the PQ may be ahead in the polls now, they haven't created much separation between themselves and the Liberals. It's hard to see them doing any better, given the horrendous circumstances that the Liberals find themselves in.
Let's face it, could things get any worse for Mr. Charest?

The ball and chain that a referendum represents is the driving force in the political movement that Francois Legault represents. He has promised Quebeckers that he'll skip an un-winnable referendum, but remain strongly nationalistic, music to the ears of most Quebeckers.

Polls indicate that a new party led by Mr. Legault would defeat the PQ and the Liberals in an election. Worse still for the PQ, they would likely finish third in that scenario.

But the biggest disaster that the PQ may face, is to have their fondest wish fulfilled, that is, a Charest resignation.
A  renewed Liberal party under new and popular leader, say Denis Coderre or even Regis Lebaume, would also likely beat the PQ.

As for referendums, one small nugget of information in that same poll was perhaps the most interesting part of all.
 "Meanwhile, only five per cent of Quebecers whose first language is other than French would vote for the Bloc,..." LINK
We all know that in the 1995 referendum the anglos and allophones were blamed for the YES loss and to be honest, quite rightly so. They voted massively in favour of Canada. 

The separatists have always maintained that this would change with time, but apparently it hasn't, if the Leger poll is to be believed.
According to this poll, 95% of anglos and ethnic Quebeckers would not vote for the Bloc Quebecois and it isn't a great leap to say that by logical extension, they would also vote NO in another referendum.

Since 20% of Quebeckers don't have French as their mother tongue, it means that 19% of that 20% pool, would vote NO in a new referendum.
That's quite a handicap for the YES side. It means that of the remaining 80% that are francophone, 62% of them would have to vote YES for a referendum to pass.
Each year, with more and more immigrants arriving, that number goes up.

Many Quebeckers, even sovereignists, have realized that perhaps the tipping point has been passed.

The PQ finds itself between a rock and a hard place. If militants force Marois out and replace her with a more militant leader or even if they force her to promote another referendum, they are toast.

The election is almost two years away, plenty of time for the PQ to self-destruct. The real political drama in Quebec will be be the referendum struggle within the PQ.

Depending on who wins, so will go the fortunes of the party.

52 comments:

  1. There will NEVER be 62% Francophones that will vote yes. The PQ and BQ know this but it hurts, so it's better to denounce the "ethnic vote".

    In any case, I bet you guys will share my little twitter celebration this evening.

    Something to be really proud of: http://www.cyberpresse.ca/international/correspondants/201011/16/01-4343056-de-jeunes-quebecois-apostrophent-duceppe-en-ecosse.php

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mississauga Guy, hopefully making the first contribution on this thread...

    Referendum, no? Good! Referendum, yes? Good! It makes almost no difference one way or the other if there is or is not a referendum.

    If there is one, that will soak Quebec's financial position another half billion dollars or so, and it will probably lose. A plenitude of QUEBEC taxpayer dollars well, well wasted, 'cause I here in Ontario ain't payin' for it!

    This referendum thing can manufacture and enhance the appetite for a «Canada» (keeping in mind this definition of describing «Canada» excludes Quebec) to put in place a federal political party that puts «Canada's» interests first, and that is because «Canada» by then will have had enough of Quebec's antiquated machinations.

    Too, if this François Legault clown gets in, he's nothing more than a stupid placebo for separatism. He'll be nationalistic, i.e., he'll continue where the others have left off (PLQ, PQ, ADQ, whatever comes to the plate) and punish the minorities as the scapegoats of Quebec's collective majority loser society.

    François Legault has the inertness of a placebo, a sugar pill that will only cure the ills if the taker of the pill BELIEVES it will cure the pain. Separatists will swallow it willingly and feel better. The minorities certainly won't, and neither will at least half the majority population that sits on the fence anyway, voting one way or the other depending which way the wind is blowing on Referendum Day.

    As I have written before, Pauline Marois is pretty much the Constantine Chernyenko of the PQ, much like this Russian was the last of the Old Guard in the former Soviet Union. I don't think Landry will take another kick at the can, idiot that he was for not accepting his 76% vote of confidence, neither will Yves Duhaîme, and the rest are dead or past their time! The militants have eaten all their founding leaders and there is nothing left.

    I think the smartest one in the group to take over is indeed Gilles Duceppe, if he can steer the course for five years. He'll make a sacrifice play, i.e., survive as an MNA for five years, do absolutely nothing for the PQ's fortunes, but enable himself to stack his lucrative federal MP's pension with a more modest but still generous MNA's pension. He'll then have it made for the rest of his useless existence!

    At this juncture, I really don't see anyone approaching the pulpit from any stripe that will change Quebec's fortunes around. It's chronically corrupt (when people make a hero of that recently slain mafioso, a hero who murdered, evaded taxes and trafficked drugs for a living), the Commission de la Construction du Québec doesn't allow construction workers from outside Quebec and ensures only Quebec-made materials are used and other aspects discussed in MacLean's (the bad guys) and the Quebec Francophone mass media (the good guys).

    There is neither a political party nor a majority population willing to treat the minorities fairly, and too many of them want something-for-nothing when they don't even pay tax.

    Who cares about Quebec politics anymore, and what do we need a «Canada»-hating majority for anyway? «Canada» to them is only as good as the funding they could pry out of her--i.e., something-for-nothing!

    Referendum, no? Good! Referendum, yes? Even better!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, I posted my comment and it looks as if I won't be first after all. Oh, sucky poo! Mississauga Guy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am really dismayed by this analysis as it indicates to me that Quebec will not be taking their leave any time soon. Unfortunate, for the rest of the country of Canada, which would be far better with Quebec no longer a member. Too bad, although I suspected this would likely be the case at the end of the day.

    Canada could be a great country if only Quebec would depart and take with them their deceit and corruption which has been a continous drag on the country as a whole.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Voila quelque chose qui me rend fier:

    http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/311073/succes-monstre-d-une-petition-anti-charest

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mississauga Guy said...

    Hark! Is this a Quebec dissident I hear from at 2am this morning?

    Not that I want to usurp the Editor's thunder (and he has been a good sport), but I hope he doesn't mind my superimposing a little and asking for upcoming respondants to this thread to, in addition to their own comments, express what they would think about a federal political party that puts the aspirations of «Canada» first(in this context, «Canada» is defined as excluding Quebec--I hate the "English Canada" moniker mischieviously concocted by Lucien Bouchard when he founded the BQ two decades ago).

    Please bear in mind officially there is no federal political party currently in the works, except in my mind, but I DON'T want to be the sole mind and management of the party. A successful political party MUST have a grass roots foundation and build from the bottom up. Too many parties fail because they are top-down, and as you can see from the past, this strictly limits the life of the concept let alone the party.

    As tempting as it is, the objective would not be to create a zealous, vindictive "one-trick pony". The party would have to come up with a platform that deals with contemporary social, economic and political issues and how these issues can be used to better our country, with or without Quebec.

    What the party would NOT be out to do is force or coerce Quebec to separate from «Canada», neither overtly nor covertly. This is not to state the media, especially the touchy French language media in Quebec, would not see it this way. I think it's inevitable they would, but that has been the modus operandi of their media since God [or the Big Bang] created the universe. I'm sure much of the Quebec population would agree with their media whether by its influence or simply the individual's own hypotheses and beliefs.

    Finally, the objective would be to place candidates in most constituencies, hopefully all constituencies outside Quebec, and limited ones in Quebec specifically where the minorities reside in the greatest numbers. At this time, the ones I tentatively envisage include just about the entire Island of Montreal west of St-Laurent Street (aka, the Main). In Laval, I can only see the Chomedey/Ste-Dorothée constituency as having a chance of winning and Greenfield Park/St-Lambert on the South Shore. Even those off-Island constituencies are not an easy reach (but then again, nothing is).

    Placing candidates anywhere else in Quebec would prove to be impractical except for a smattering of protest votes; furthermore, having lived the first half of my life in Quebec growing up with the Quiet Revolution, Bill 22 came into law in 1974 during my adolescence, and it was the first time I felt locked in a vacuum in the place where I was born and raised, and in that 36-year period there has been NO federal voice that caters to me...to us. Until my dying day, I will never accept being made to feel like a foreigner where I was born. It's certainly not a unique circumstance in this world, but it's not right, normal or acceptable either.

    I am putting this out there to get a gage on whether the readers think this is a practical idea. Trolls need not respond.

    Editor, I hope you will permit me to indulge this one time on your blog, and impose on your good nature.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "...Until my dying day, I will never accept being made to feel like a foreigner where I was born."

    Pauvre petit Missi,c'est normal de se sentir rejeté lorsqu'on refuse de parler la langue de ses compatriote...Sniff!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm surprised it took 100 minutes for a troll to respond. I hope more logical, constructive minds prevail over the course of the day. Mississauga Guy.

    ReplyDelete
  9. @ derteilzeitberliner

    I love the LaPresse link. This is what I'm talking about. Don't be afraid to challenge the "holy scripture" of Quebec and the cynics who stand behind it.

    We had the "L'Illusion Tranquille" documentary, we had Gilbert Rozon, Gerard Deltell, and G.Frigon criticizing the language policy of Quebec.

    All of it is good, but it’s still not enough. And note that the 3 gentlemen were hounded after making their remarks, and NEVER repeated it in public again.

    ReplyDelete
  10. ''Pauvre petit Missi,c'est normal de se sentir rejeté lorsqu'on refuse de parler la langue de ses compatriote...Sniff!''

    Translate this into English and you have the minoritarian Canadian sentiment towards Quebec. What a lovely ''nation'' of hypocracy we have. I love how this delusional ''treatment'' they complain about is the same one they express towards non-pure laine. Here's what they complain the English used to say and supposedly still do ''Quit whining Frenchy and assimilate''. Quebecker's now have distinct status and an ''officially'' Fench province and they choose to handle it now by countering with "Allez petit anglo. Arrete de pleurer et integre toi''. I suppose your solution to the Holocaust would be for Jews to round up all the Germans and cook them in an oven? Or how about black people enslave white people and take them to Africa? Or how about Native Amricans rally and try to exterminate all white people? There are many other human historical blunders you can NOT learn from too. There's quite litterally an infinite supply. I figure if Quebec is already drifting socially backwards may as well do it in full force. Go big or go home right?

    ReplyDelete
  11. The 'yes' side didn't lose or become a lost cause because Francophones were won over. The Feds simply imported non-Francophones into Quebec to increase the 'no' vote. Not very noble. The government has dissolved the Quebec people and elected a new one. The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "...The Feds simply imported non-Francophones into Quebec to increase the 'no' vote."

    Ou étiez-vous en 95?

    ReplyDelete
  13. "The Feds simply imported non-Francophones into Quebec to increase the 'no' vote. Not very noble."

    How many?

    It wasn't very noble for the separatists in charge at the polling stations to reject thousands of valid 'no' votes either.

    International observers should be a part of any future referendum. Perhaps we can bring in observers from another 'progressive' Francophone 'nation' in the western hemisphere: Haiti.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I invite all English voter to seriously consider credible alternatives to the PLQ corrupted party like for instance the ADQ or even the start up of a new pro-English party like the Equality party not so far away in time.

    Best regards,

    TM

    ReplyDelete
  15. Mississauga Guy to Anglo in Montreal, 12:26 PM:

    This is why I'm a happy, proud Mississaugan and a former Lavallois. Leave Quebec to take an assignment just about anywhere else in Canada, and you'll likely never return, esp. if you're young and not "planted" due to work/family commitments.

    ReplyDelete
  16. To Missassagua Guy

    "This is why I'm a happy, proud Mississaugan and a former Lavallois. Leave Quebec to take an assignment just about anywhere else in Canada, and you'll likely never return, esp. if you're young and not "planted" due to work/family commitments."
    The only reason I'd move to Ontario or anywhere else in Canada would be primarily for work reasons. I've been to Toronto a couple of times and I must say, it's quite a boring city. It feels like a cheap imitation of New York. Most people I met here in Montreal who are Torontonians prefer it here. And yes, they work here. And so do I. My main frustration is the discrimination that goes in the province's civil service sector . Otherwise, I live in the Italian bastion of St.Leonard, we all speak English to one another, we have out own community services and get served in Italian, English and French. I have no reason to move, all my family and friends are here and I can't afford to move out now anyways.

    I'm a proud Montrealer, and always will be, regardless of my future residence. This is my home. I'm happy to live in a city where I can speak both languages. Needless to say, I do not agree with Bill 101/115/86 etc... And as for your "Canada hating majority", I'd like to see some statistics on that because no one, and I mean no one seems to hate Canada, at least in the neighbourhoods that I hang out. And btw, don't use the PQ elections as evidence because in most cases, they were elected out of frustration with the other parties and saw them as the best of all evils. We can clearly see this by the slight majority that Marois holds. Sovereigntists make up quite the minority nowadays and yet she's slightly ahead in the polls....

    Montrealers would rather elect a mob controlled administration than a unilingual separatist.

    Anglo Montrealer

    ReplyDelete
  17. @ti_Machin

    A en juger par vos goûts littéraires et cinématographiques,vous semblez être le candidat tout désigné pour mettre sur pieds un nouveau parti anglo au Québec.Un type +/- équilibré.
    Cependant,pas sur que vous soyez assez solide sur vos pattes pour aller au bat.
    Ho my god!Ça fait dure en ostie!

    Note:Voir le profile de petit machin

    ReplyDelete
  18. Toronto Guy, I hope more immigration to quebec takes place and dilutes the majority there even more. I for one am glad that toronto is diluted as well. I remember the days of paki bashing and how it stopped when the "pakis" bashed back.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I'm not glad that Toronto is diluted. There was no "paki bashing" when there were no Pakistanis around. So if your goal was/is to stop "paki bashing" that aim was already achieved. Toronto was a safer and happier city and more livable too. The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @Adski

    Marc Cassivi takes on Gilles Proulx's "tête carrée" statement on V Monday.

    http://www.cyberpresse.ca/chroniqueurs/marc-cassivi/201011/17/01-4343805-le-racisme-a-deux-vitesses.php

    This is almost incredible. Only months ago, you wouldn't have seen this.

    ReplyDelete
  21. To derteilzeitberliner @November 18, 2010 1:26 AM

    I will be posting the complete video of Gilles Proulx outburst on Friday's edition of "French versus English."
    He was really quite vicious!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Good, the fever is heating up which will lead to more good things such as the Quebecois going it on their own. The West is becoming increasingly irritated with the continual whining and equalization going to this unproductive and stagnant province. A province full of corruption from municipalities to the "national assembly". In addition a province whose governing officials sanction discrimination against minorities. Sad but true. Quebec does not represent Canadian values and should leave. Good luck.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "I'm surprised it took 100 minutes for a troll to respond. I hope more logical, constructive minds prevail over the course of the day."

    Stop copy and paste the same old comment.We already know about your life and how fascist Québec treated you 40 years ago.I'm not a troll,you're just annonying and boring.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The toronto guy, I hope your types keep finding it more unsafe. I know exactly how smug and hypocritical you can be. No wonder you have affinity for the Pur laine chauvanist scum.
    I guess with more "pakis" around it safer for types like me. I am glad that "pakis" also hold a larger leverage on political and economic power in the past. Even though you'll deny it.
    You can go live North Bay and you'll see how safe it is, despite having your own kind as neighbours.

    Anyway I am glad your bubble got popped and your in a minority now. Just look at whats happening to the suburbs all the way to Barrie in the North, London to the west and Port Hope in the East. Without immigrants and constant population growth Toronto would have been stagnant like Buffalo, NY. Which would have been worst in Montreal, if not for immigration.

    There is no more manufacturing industry of consequence and the only reason it is thriving in late 2000s is needs of a growing population.

    ReplyDelete
  25. @derteilzeitberliner 1:26AM

    Good stuff. I hope this becomes a trend.

    Anon 8:55AM

    You bring up good points. And the thing about MGuy and TGuy is that these are 2 white geezers who are scared of new things. MGuy flipped out once when I mentioned that the English-French-Other balance will be changing in Canada. Poor chap, living in Mississauga “infested” with “Pakis” and “Pollacks” – they guy’s world is turning upside down. And I wonder if MGuy ever goes to Vancouver. I’d suggest that he doesn’t, or he’ll get a heart attack.

    But reality is ruthless – any larger metropolitan center in Canada is no longer predominantly white-English or white-French.

    And I agree with you about immigration in Quebec. I like the fact that we bring in so many immigrants. The faster well dilute this place, the faster we’ll see some sort of balance and equality, as opposed to one ethnic group strutting around and shoving things down everyone else’s throats.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Mississauga Guy to Anon @ 8:44AM this morning:

    I don't cut and paste unless I fully disclose I am or have done so, and it's usually to explicitly direct an answer to a specific questioner. If you don't like my writing, pass over it, or put up and shut up or get off the blog.

    ReplyDelete
  27. To anon at 8:55 AM;

    "..I know how smug and hypocritical you can be..."

    Actually you don't know anything about me at all.

    "..safer for types like me.."

    I don't know "what type" you are but isn't it chivalrous of you that you are glad for your safety and indifferent to mine. Thank you for that.

    As to your last comment that immigration is needed for growth that is a complete and utter canard. It simply is not true.

    To Adski:

    Your right that large urban areas have changed. Not that anyone was ever asked if they wanted the changes. But beyond that to me there is something terribly wrong and ignoble about defeating the separatists by replacing them with ethnic outsiders.

    By the way if anyone is interested about SAFETY please check out the Toronto police services website. Under community services please click on homicide squad. After you see the obligatory ballyhoo about the "joys" of diversity click on MOST WANTED. A picture(s) is worth a thousand words. The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  28. @toronto guy,

    why should I care about your safety? (not sure why you would be in any special danger then that of the relatively safe general public in toronto) When your type try to make scapegoats of others? What interest do I have in really caring about your interest, when you don't care about mine?

    Tell me one thing? Do you have any common sense in that closed minded head of yours? Can you really tell me that without immigrations' direct population growth that Toronto would have been able to appear on the ranks of other metropolitian cities such as Chicago? In the 1980s and early 1990s toronto had less people then metro detroit area. All toronto would have been without this immigration and service related industry would have been a small financial capital of Canada, some remnants of manufacturing and basically a glorified city of the american rustbelt, stagnant with collapsing property values.

    The reason I consider you smug and hypocritical is because your kind always think they are in the right because they offer non politcally correct arguements, but are not ready to recieve the same arguements in return.

    Also newer immigrants (not refugees) actually contribute a greater percentage of their lower incomes to taxes then local born lower earners. They are also less likely to be on welfare. Though they don't really have time to be blogs and newspapers to put their comments to counterpoint smug and hypocritcal people like yourself.

    Thats why I hope Toronto guy can become North Bay or Thunderbay guy. Funny when in 20 years even those cities demographics will change. Maybe he can move to Yellowknife or something.

    while your talking about the most wanted toronto guy. Why don't you actually look at the statistics of the prisons based on each minority and their share of the population? Why don't you also check who is the majority of persons on the provincial welfare roles based on percentage of their population?

    The biggest question yet, what is the percentage of government positions based on population share allocated to each minority group?

    I am not really for affirmative action and have never needed it. I find the private sector in Toronto is very diversified and is willing to hire without hesitation members of any minority who have the skills needed to do the job at lowest pay possible.

    Unlike the Ontario provincial bureaucracy that uses affirmative action to pad its ranks with white women at the expense of other minorities.

    Rob ford won because he had the majority of support from immigrants because he was against the gravy train. What was the demographics of Smithermans supporters?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Mississauga Guy to Anglo Montrealer...

    1 of 2:

    In response to your remarks of November 17, 2010 @ 4:25PM, I'm very happy for you. I'm not condemning anyone who is a proud Montrealer. If you want to speak both languages, the modern day Toronto has a place for you.

    There are bilingual jobs out here. I know, I have one and I speak French each and every day on the job. Some days I don't speak English over the phone, so I am getting to keep up my French, not pay the extortionate taxes being charged in Quebec, and not be associated with the hateful, bigoted innuendos expressed right over the TV (in French, of course).

    I'll be rooting for the Habs during the Leafs-Habs game on TV tomorrow night. I never abandoned my loyalties, and while I'm not a big CFL fan, I'll support the Als on Sunday as they have the more entertaining of the two teams.

    Anyway, I'm not going to bore or try to mislead you and the other readers and contributors with statistics. I needn't do so.

    I derive my hypothesis about the majority of Quebecers hating Canada right from the portals of the National Assembly. Who is standing up for the minorities? WHO? Of all the political parties that currently exist in Quebec, not one of them supports protection of the minorities. NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM!

    If the PLQ is supposed to be the party that most closely models itself after federalism, then WOW but that's a wolf in sheep's clothing...or is it the other way around? They could have fooled me! It's disgusting that a few children who have learning disabilities with French cannot be moved into English schools that still exist in Quebec. I of course have that child in mind who had to be moved to the State of Delaware to obtain an English language education.

    -Continued_

    ReplyDelete
  30. Mississauga Guy to Anglo Montrealer...

    2 of 2:

    Even Bill 101 has a couple of mercy clauses (Sections 81 and 85) that recognize children with severe learning disabilities or mental challenges are to be given consideration.

    Then the Bill 104 football gets fumbled and with so much grease on it, nobody can seem to properly grasp the thing, and it keeps on bouncing around erratically while foolish minions flop to the ground trying to recover it.

    The zealousness of each and every political party in Quebec to prevent a miniscule few from obtaining an English language education is far beyond the ridiculous. Worse yet, the few English speaking MNAs in the house swallow their pride and themselves whole like Quislings and stringed puppets to the will of their leader who is clearly wrong!

    There hasn't been an Anglo MNA with any gonads in the house since December 1988 when three of the very best voted against their leader and his Bill 188. Do the Anglophone MNAs of today really represent you? ABSOLUTELY NOT! They don't have any backbone whatsoever. They're in it for the pension money. If they weren't, they would NEVER in their right mind support the b.s. legislation that has come down the pipe over this language nuttiness.

    Quebec is a poutine, Pepsi and Jos Louis republic, a sick joke and a disgrace to the Canadian national fabric. It's an embarrasment to be associated with Quebec and its cast of blatant bigots the Editor posts in his blog of November 19, 2010. A person comes on TV and is permitted without censuring to use terms like tête carré? How fast do you think the derogatory N connotation rhyming with the name of Roy Roger's horse (Trigger) to describe black people would be heard on TV? I'm sure that person would be thrown out of the studio in short order, or cut off at the quick, or the innuendo would be bleeped out.

    The fact the so-called federalist PLQ is as brutal if not more so than the separatist parties enforcing language zealousness, the fact blatant racist innuendos can be uttered uncensored, the fact the minorities are way underrepresented in the civil service and professional organizations with nobody other than the minorities pointing it out, and the fact there is a language police that picks on the small in the business world over miniscule, petty things convinces me Quebecers of the majority ilk do indeed hate English speaking Canadians.

    Who amongst them speaks up for us? Who amongst the minority MNAs represents their constituents over their leader on pain of expulsion from the Party?

    If you, Anglo Montrealer, are proud to live in a Francophone confederacy akin to the American South in the 18th and 19th centuries, you can have it!

    ReplyDelete
  31. To anon at 8:12 AM:

    Your post was pretty much nonsense but just for the record to even try to compare Detroit and Toronto is nonsense. And Detroit is a mess because OF its demographics (it never recovered from that massive race riot in 1967. So much for the "joys" of diversity). Immigrants add little, if anything, to the economy, and the "so-called refugees" (like that boatload of Tamils who have already cost us over 22 million bucks) are a parasiticial drain. Toronto was doing just fine before it was inundated with third world ethnics (which we never asked for) and it is a clear FACT certain "minority" groups are disproportionately involved in crime and violence, something anyone involved in the criminal-justice system clearly knows. You also talk about "minorites in governmental postions". But the great majority of these "minorities" could just as easily be called foreigners and immigrants. Why should they just walk into a comfy government job? The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  32. @toronto guy

    Did the natives ask to have europeans come over to north america and takeover their land and reward them with diseases they had no immunity too, which also wiped the majority of their population? Of course we are going to get the common civilizing and growth arguements from your types. Never mind the self serving economic gains and hypocrisy of the arguments and you going to bury it as being part of the past.

    I also made a distinction between refugees and immigrants, but I guess you don't care. Lets look at the 1920s and 1930s immigration. Who were the bootleggers and mafia groups demographics back then? Remember because it was probably alot harder to distinguish based on skin colour of these different groups. these groups had to deal with many similar prejudices but their numbers eventually made them mainstream and they used their muscle power to become mainstream. I am also going to lump you in with those groups because like you do, lumping third world ethnics together. I am going to lump you in with those who gained from the criminal past of their ancestors. Proceeds of crime. I guess based on your previous arguements above, this is legitimate and fair for me to do.

    Detroit and Buffalo are a great comparison. Detroit didn't go down due to immigration, that diversity riot was all locals from southern united states? Or do you think even they don't deserve to be there? There was third world immigration to Detroit even in the late 1800s, reason why there is a big arab community in detroit (dearborn). Despite Toronto(city proper and many suburbs such as Markham, brampton) being majority visible minority, Toronto is still an economic powerhouse.

    The only comparsion i did between Toronto and Detroit was that the metro area of Detroit had more of a population then toronto did. Detroit still has the 5th richest county in the united states in its metro area, Oakland.

    Until the decline of Montreal, Toronto wasn't even that known city. It was a manufacturing hub and thats about it. With the arrival of Montreals financial industry Toronto became the financial capital of Canada and with continued population growth.

    You are comparing 22 million dollars, how about the drain of all the local born white single mothers on welfare? that dwarfs the 22 million dollars. Eventually the tamil refugees will go and do lower level labour work and their kids will train and educate themselves into another class of the economic model, just like the italians, portugeese, and other immigrant groups before them.

    As for the government jobs, nobody should have a comfortable government job just for the sake of being from one group or the other, but why shouldn't those BORN in Canada and paying taxes from minority groups have a chance at them either.

    Isn't it convenient for you to lump all immigrants and minority groups together. Though you clearly don't want to lump white immigrants with visible minorities but you will lump all visible minorities as one ethnic group.

    Yeap I was so right about my smug and hyporcritical description of you.

    Not suprised why you support the pur laine sepratist types indirectly.

    If it was not for immigration in Quebec. Most English dominated industries and infrastructure would have been francisized and English speaking community would have headed the way of Sherbrookes English speaking community.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Adiski,

    you are so right about the need for Canada to become more diluted. no one group should have absolute power to do tyranny of the majority.

    Since the english speaking community was not homogeneous and closed minded like the pur laine community, you had alot more newcomers adapting into the english community. Before 1977 and after as well.

    ReplyDelete
  34. To The Toronto guy,

    A bibliophile such as yourself might be interested in reading a newly published book by Lowell Green, who is Canada's version of Rush Limbaugh. It is called "Mayday! Mayday!" and he argues against both immigration and multiculturalism the book. I haven't read it myself but I'm sure it would appeal to your sensibilities.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Reply to anon at 3:45 pm:

    More drivel from you. First immigration is a privilege not a right. Your comments about the Aboriginals change nothing. Do you have the "right" to just go live in Australia, New Zealand or Argentina or is it the right of those people living in those countries to decide for themselves who their immigrants should be - or even if they should have any immigration at all.

    To say I am a "hypocrite" shows nothing but your own PROJECTIONISM, since you know nothing about me at all. (How dare this guy not appreciate how I am "enriching" his life with diversity.) It is YOU who are using the self-serving argument about immigration and aboriginals not me. My ancestors came here almost 400 years ago, after an arduous journey, they got NO WELFARE, FREE MEDICAL CARE, schools, etc, but they built a country you don't mind inviting yourself to live in do you? To say I am a "hypocrite" because I very seriously question the wisdom of allowing mass-immigration from the third world just shows your own thoughts and need to rationalize your undesired presence here. Canadians never voted on the demographic changes that have overwhelmed them and would have said NO if they had been given a choice. Is a guy in Alabama a "hypocrite" if he speaks out against African slavery because it occurred in his state 145 years ago? If there is (god forbid) another holocaust 300 years from now, would Germans be "hypocrites" for speaking out against it? Are Europeans who condemn witch-burnings in sub-saharan Africa "hypocrites" because this happened in 17th century Europe. Nonsense.

    By the way as far as the Tamil "refugees" go they are SIMPLY PARASITES who shouldn't be here. It has been reliably established that about 95% of so-called "refugees" are con artists and scamsters who take advantage of our misguided laws.

    Toronto was doing just fine when it was essentially a White city. We certainly didn't need or ask for people like yourself, but obviously you won't agree.

    Now you will undoubtedly make more accusations about me thus revealing your projectionism yet again. The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Reply to anon:

    There is no "need" for Canada to be more diluted. But I guess it is a nice self-serving argument, huh? How does Adski feel that having tons of immigration to "dilute" the Quebecois (not to make Quebec a better place mind you, but to dilute French-Canadians and ensure they can never exit Canada) is any different from what Lord Durham recommended 170 years ago? If you want to use mass immigration from totally foreign people of alien cultures to smash up the Quebecois then you should at least be as honest about it as he was. And of course you will have to agree that the Quebecois may not appreciate your "dilution" of them. The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  37. To Anglo Bashers:

    Thanks for the tip buddy. I'll do that. Why don't you read Jared Taylor, JAPAN, IN PRAISE OF HOMOGENEITY.

    The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Anglo Montrealer to Mississauga Guy...

    "There are bilingual jobs out here. I know, I have one and I speak French each and every day on the job. Some days I don't speak English over the phone, so I am getting to keep up my French, not pay the extortionate taxes being charged in Quebec, and not be associated with the hateful, bigoted innuendos expressed right over the TV (in French, of course)."
    First of all, you don't have to watch the French channels that have a biased separatist views of the world. There's English language media too in Quebec, as well as TONS and TONS of English channels throughout the globe, especially if you have satellite. Most places have worked at have satellite TV and they NEVER play any French channels.

    "I derive my hypothesis about the majority of Quebecers hating Canada right from the portals of the National Assembly. Who is standing up for the minorities? WHO? Of all the political parties that currently exist in Quebec, not one of them supports protection of the minorities. NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM!"
    I'm not trying to defend the Liberal Party here, but all this means is that they don't like minorities. Most federal politicians have done nothing for minorities throughout the country, especially the English in Quebec and Aboriginals. Does this mean they hate Canada? No, it just means that they don't give a damn about anyone else but themselves and will do anything to get a vote. What else is new?

    "I of course have that child in mind who had to be moved to the State of Delaware to obtain an English language education."
    So do I, but I think that the parents should have brought this to the Quebec Superior Court. The French Charter DOES allow children with medically proven learning disabilities to attend English school. Chances are that they could have won the court case. The English media in Quebec should have made this story much more public to let the world know what Bill 101 really is and its effects on everyone in the province (yes, even Francophones, for they cannot attend English school if they wanted to do).

    "If the PLQ is supposed to be the party that most closely models itself after federalism, then WOW but that's a wolf in sheep's clothing...or is it the other way around?"
    I can't recall a single party throughout Quebec's history that completely endorsed Canadian federalism. Of course, none were separatists like the PQ, but the point is that French and English Canadians have also fought over what was in their best interests, and this is extremely likely to continue in the future. Time and time again, we see separatists make up the minority in the province.

    As for your other points,when a lie is told often enough, it becomes truth. People are convinced that the Canadian confederation is a danger to the French language, which is why they think the language laws are a "necessary evil", sorta speak. People are too afraid to stand up to politicians who don't represent them and the only reason most West Islanders zealously support the Liberals is because of their "federalist" stance. As long as no "separatist" is in power, Anglos/Allos are fine with it. They refuse to think outside the box.

    In any case MG, I'm proud to live in a city where both English and French cultures flourish next to one another and quite frankly, I think that the OQLF is such a big deal is because businesses make it out to be. I've heard of a few cases where language inspectors were literally thrown out of the workplaces and told to F off. Businesses can do the same, as can offices.

    ReplyDelete
  39. @ toronto guy.

    Well your up to your pick and choose arguements again. 400 years ago their may have not been any medicare, welfare or public schools. There was neither, a police force, and public sanitation dept either as well as most services you have now that you didn't have 400 years ago. Whats your point? Most of the world was in the same boat back then. Do you want to go back to the days without toilets and street cleaning?

    Well your family benifited directly from the proceeds of colonization. If you don't mind gaining wealth from the backs other. after all your claim to fame is that your family encouraged by colonial immigration and motivation of economic gain came to canada. Which by the way didn't exist back then.

    Your ancestors diluted canada 400 years ago and let you become a majority on land that you had gained by association of a european colonizer. You just don't like when its brought up and you will argue exactly the way you do.

    Your arguements are so typical. Your exactly the hypocritcal and smug person i described in my earlier post. I have a right to be here based on my family having legally immigrated here and I won't be a second class citizen just because you want me to be so. I pay taxesas well and I have the right to vote.

    YOU have no statistical information that you can bring to prove your points. You love to racially clump all visible minorties together when it is convenient.

    You don't really offer any counter arguements, just personal opinions that reflect your bigoted self, but expect others to be politically correct.

    Anyway based on your attitude stated clearly TOronto Guy, Toronto and many of its suburbs are not white majority anymore and we don't value or really need your opinion. If you include new caucasion minorities, that Toronto guy would include as part of "white" when convenient, the demographic group he is part of is even less. The demographic profile of not only Toronto but all of Ontario will be changing

    There is no point arguing with you. I am glad canada is diluted and yes Quebecs pur laine francophone majority has to be diluted as well as they do not deserve to use their tyranny of their majority against english speakers in quebec then reap the rewards of a massive "WELFARE" through equalization.


    TORONTO GUY admits he supports Pur laine chauvanism.

    I PROVED my point

    ReplyDelete
  40. TGuy: “My ancestors came here almost 400 years ago, after an arduous journey, they got NO WELFARE, FREE MEDICAL CARE, schools, etc, but they built a country you don't mind inviting yourself to live in do you?”

    What an ignoramus you are.

    You didn’t have any things you mentioned, that’s correct. However, you had guns and smallpox, and you had a native population to “deal with”. And you sure “dealt” with them.

    I would suggest this book for you to read: http://tinyurl.com/2dacf72

    TGuy: “because I very seriously question the wisdom of allowing mass-immigration”

    You have the right to question it. But you have no right to expect that immigrants who have already arrived submit to you, or emulate you. Just like Quebec nationalists, you seem to expect exactly that.

    TGuy: “Is a guy in Alabama a "hypocrite" if he speaks out against African slavery because it occurred in his state 145 years ago?”

    ??? Are you speaking out against slavery? What's the relevance of this example?

    ReplyDelete
  41. To The Toronto guy,

    "My ancestors came here almost 400 years ago, after an arduous journey"

    This might suggest that your ancestors came from France, and would therefore explain your unconditional support for the Quebecois.

    If you think that recent immigrants are such a burden on Canada, why don't you attack Quebec, which has been bleeding Ontario and other provinces dry financially for decades?

    ReplyDelete
  42. To Adski:

    I don't expect anyone to "submit" to me. And you Do enjoy all the benefits today that were created by pioneers hundreds of years ago. Benefits created by my (and other) ancestors who you hypocritically mock and condemn. You enjoy those benefits, but when somebody points out you did nothing to deserve them, then you suddenly try to play the Aboriginal card.

    The Toronto guy. (By the way I am not a French-Canadian.)

    ReplyDelete
  43. "And you Do enjoy all the benefits today that were created by pioneers hundreds of years ago"

    I enjoy the benefits that I partly create. As a worker and a TAXPAYER, I contribute to all that. You seem to disregard that and think that we're all sitting on our asses and "benefitting" from the superior society that your "pioneer" ancestors built.

    And as for the criticism, well, I reserve the right to criticize and even make a nuisance of myself ANYWHERE I pay taxes.

    "Benefits created by my (and other) ancestors "

    Ibid.

    "You enjoy those benefits"

    Ibid.

    “when somebody points out you did nothing to deserve them”

    I do not deserve them? I worked my ass off, graduated from university, worked full time ever since the graduation, never been on govt assistance/unemployment/welfare, always paid taxes.

    You are an even bigger ignoramus than I thought.

    "play the Aboriginal card."

    I do play the aboriginal card on anyone too elated about this society and who has a very selective interpretation of history.

    ReplyDelete
  44. To Adski:

    It is YOU who have a selective interpretation of history. But here is my basic point; immigration is a privilege, not a right. And you DO enjoy all the benefits of a modern advanced country created by people unlike you, who you speak disparagingly and hypocritically about. When this is pointed out you try to play an "Aboriginal" card (probably the only time you ever give these people a thought). Do you have the "right" to live in Mexico because Cortez conquered the Aztecs in 1521? Do you have the "right" to live in Peru because the Spanish overwhelmed the Incas there in 1536? I don't think that is a valid viewpoint at all. So why would violence between Indians and Whites in say, 1721, give you the "right" to live in Canada? In a more modern vein millions of Han Chinese are being moved (as a planned action by the Chinese government) into Tibet and Xinjiang displacing the indigenous Uighurs and Tibetans. Does that give me the "right" to live in China? I don't think so at all. Immigration is a privilege, not a right. Oh and by the way, thanks for your cheap shot insults about me being an "ignoramus". Your a real tough guy talking big behind the safety of an anonymous keyboard. The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Immigration is neither a right nor a privilege. For most immigrants, it's hard work first and foremost.

    Also, don't forget that Canada brings over so many immigrants not out of the goodness of its heart, but for a much more practical (and selfish) reason - to shore up its declining population. So remember that before you ask me to paint a maple leaf on my forehead and crawl on my knees thanking you (and your pioneer lumberjack ancestors) for accepting me into your country.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Mississauga Guy to Anglo Montrealer re your response on Nov 21 @ 8:29PM...

    Mississauga Guy to Anglo Montrealer re your response on Nov 21 @ 8:29PM...

    1 of 2:

    I don't understand your first rebuttal about French TV. I don't watch it for most of it is the junk food the naïve P'tit Québécois pur laine from Lac St-Jean/Saguenay minds like poutine, chiens chaud vapeur, and Jos Louis is junk food for the gut and arteries (all washed down with un grand Pepsi, sans doux).

    La Soirée du Hockey was my fill of French TV for the week when SRC was able to carry Habs games and being stuck behind the Leaf curtain, my only foray into what can be called NHL civilization.

    That Gilles Proulx and those of his ilk being given an audience are what make for junk food TV, and there are those who feed on it and perpetuate the hatred of everything Heenglish and Canadian. Can you also find me channels in the Southern U.S. that legitimize racial innuendos about people of color? Câlisse!

    -Continued-

    ReplyDelete
  47. Mississauga Guy to Anglo Montrealer re your response on Nov 21 @ 8:29PM...

    2 of 2

    Then you write: "I'm not trying to defend the Liberal Party here, but all this means is that they don't like minorities. Most federal politicians have done nothing for minorities throughout the country, especially the English in Quebec and Aboriginals. Does this mean they hate Canada? No, it just means that they don't give a damn about anyone else but themselves and will do anything to get a vote. What else is new?"

    So you're saying two wrongs make a right? It's legitimate to ignore the plight of Anglophones in Quebec and Aboriginals nationwide? It almost sounds as if you're advocating this behaviour as acceptable, or as the cliché goes in Quebec: "C'est normal!" Sorry, but that doesn't sit well with me, and the fact Quebecers reflect, internalize and legitimize this behaviour clearly shows their indifference towards the rest of Canada. They're out for what they can get and to hell with the rest of us.

    Regarding your remarks about that little boy who had to go all the way to Delaware for English schooling: So you're saying his parents should have gone bankrupt hiring a lawyer to be granted the rights Bill 101 already recognizes? This is EXACTLY what the government wants! They have much deeper pockets than individuals. Why couldn't a simple plea to their MNA and/or the Minister of Education be enough? I just dignified your stupid response!

    Re your remark: "I can't recall a single party throughout Quebec's history that completely endorsed Canadian federalism." Sadly, the divisions are deepening, and especially have for the last half century. It's this incompatibility that leads me to believe it's time for a federal party that no longer allows the tail to wag the dog as your remarks later in that paragraph insinuate.

    Re your remarks: "As for your other points,when a lie is told often enough, it becomes truth. People are convinced that the Canadian confederation is a danger to the French language, which is why they think the language laws are a "necessary evil", sorta speak. People are too afraid to stand up to politicians who don't represent them and the only reason most West Islanders zealously support the Liberals is because of their "federalist" stance. As long as no "separatist" is in power, Anglos/Allos are fine with it. They refuse to think outside the box."

    This is EXACTLY why I've left Quebec! I'm not that meek and I'm not that stupid. Now I see how this is hurting the rest of Canada, how the tail is endlessly wagging the dog, it's causing vertigo to the rest of Canada, and as a proud Ontario taxpayer, I've had enough of Quebec, and it's time the Anglophone majority takes its country back.

    Big business can and have told the OQLF inspectors where to go, but it's the smaller business upon whom they throw their weight around. See what happens if and when the small business try that tactic.

    Finally, yes, Montreal is a great place (for me) to visit (because I speak adequate French), but I wouldn't want to live there, not with their politics and taxes! Oh, and corruption, of course!

    ReplyDelete
  48. To Adski: (My final post on this matter. I would like to thank the author of this blog for his forbearance).

    WRONG!!!!! Immigration is INDEED a privilege. It is NOT a right! To say it is neither, is like saying one can be just a little bit pregnant.

    Your claim about a "demographic need" for high immigration is a complete and utter canard. Japan has one of the lowest birthrates in the world and has zero immigration. And believe me Adski life was a million times harder for my ancestors who BUILT THIS COUNTRY YOU ENJOY then it is for you.

    One last thing Adski. Please don't think all of us are stupid. I never drank the Trudeau-imposed multiculturalism KOOLAID nonsense.

    The Toronto guy.

    ReplyDelete
  49. "Immigration is INDEED a privilege. "

    I know why you want to believe it. By thinking that immigrating to Canada is a privilege, you boost up your own self esteem just by the fact that you’re from this country. You think about Canada exactly as Quebec nationalists think about Quebec - that Quebec is some sort of promised land where we, the “maitres chez nous”, “welcome” (accueillent) you, the immigrant. And you, the immigrant, have to be eternally grateful and respectful of the “hosts”. Nothing is made of the fact that no red carpet is ever rolled out for any immigrant, and that most of the help they receive in the beginning comes from their ethnic communities.

    Sorry to burst your bubble about this, but as I told many Quebec nationalists, you will get no respect or recognition from me just because you’re Canadian. If you want my respect, you have to get it the old fashioned way – earn it. Otherwise, you get what everyone else gets – indifference.

    As for Canada, it is a good country to live in for a while, to learn two languages, to get educated. But I can't imagine myself in this country in 10 years. I'll be going home sooner or later, maybe passing through the US or England.

    Most of my friends are Allophones, and not a single one of them thinks he/she will be staying in Canada permanently.

    So we're not even immigrants. In a sense, we're expats. And your country is OK, TGuy, but it's not all hot shit that you think it is. Don't get too big in your head about it.

    ReplyDelete
  50. "Most of my friends are Allophones, and not a single one of them thinks he/she will be staying in Canada permanently"

    C'est bien la première fois que je suis tout a fait d'accord avec vos propos.Si vous pouviez en glisser un mot a votre famille en même temps.
    Tous seriont très reconnaissant sauf qu'aux É.U ou en Angleterre,les règles sont moins souples.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Anon, don't worry, I'll stay long enough to cast a Non vote in any future "refaraindum", if there is one. I wouldn't miss it for the world.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Anon 2:17 PM

    Also there will be plenty of us left around to help dilute quebec even more

    ReplyDelete