Journalist McQuaig wants to be an MP

Toronto Star columnist Linda McQuaig will announce today she is seeking the NDP nomination in Toronto Centre. The Star‘s Susan Delacourt reports:

[McQuaig] recognizes that the prevailing winds in Toronto Centre and beyond may favour new Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau, but McQuaig said that NDP Leader Tom Mulcair is her clear choice.“When it comes to issues, performance, brains, just sheer effectiveness, [Mulcair] just has (Trudeau) totally beat,” she said. “What’s important to me is that Mulcair and the NDP is more progressive.”

Read the rest: Columnist Linda McQuaig enters NDP race in Toronto | Toronto Star.

5 thoughts on “Journalist McQuaig wants to be an MP”

  1. Mulcair is more progressive than Trudeau? Kinda like saying alligators and more carnivorous than crocs. I shuttter a Canada that has either of those socialist-marxists as our PM. They’re both useful idiots.

  2. To Paul, it is spelled “shudder”, but I wouldn’t expect proper spelling from a Conservative supporter who labels the NDP and the Liberals as ‘marxists’. I wonder if the rest of the 60-70% of the population that voted against this false Conservative “majority” are also to be dismissed as ‘marxists’.

    Linda McQuaig would no doubt bring a welcome breath of fresh air to a political system that is deep in the pockets of big corporate Canada. We need politicians that care about their constituents, not those that simply want to line their own pockets tax breaks for their corrupt corporate buddies.

  3. Dave

    FYI…I called Trudeau and McQuiag socialists-Marxists not their represented parties. The NDP however are no doubt Marxists-socialists as their history has proven as was Trudeau senior. They simply hide the word “socialist” from their title due to the dark history of those associated with that ideology. (Stalin, Castro, Lenin etc)

    McQuaig would be a breath of fresh air in the political system? Sure, like we need another anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-capitalist and anti-everything blowing hard across this great land. As for the 60-70% who voted against the Conservatives in the last election (Including myself) thats the way our political system has endured for over a century and by that rationale who was the last Canadian leader or political party (including Libs and socialist-democrats that won a majority between 60 – 70% of the popular vote? I seem to recall Chretien also had a majority governments with far less than 40% of the vote which meant more people voted against the Libs than for the Libs. Did you complain about that back in the 1990’s too?

  4. Socialism and Wealth Redistribution Don’t Work and Cause MORE Poverty, Inequality and Injustice.

    Train of thought for McQuaig… Those rich people don’t need all that money. They don’t pay their fair share of taxes. And a lot of good can be done if all that money is taken away from those people, who don’t need it anyway, and is given to other less fortunate people so that they can have better opportunities to advance their lives.

    The above paragraph seems to be the essence of leftwing economic thought. Didn’t they try that system in Cuba and the old USSR?

    I realize that many liberals these days object to the notion that what they really want is socialism. However, arguing nomenclature is of no substance. Therefore, I’m just going to say that the philosophy described above falls under the umbrella of socialism, and just call it that.

    We can argue fairness all day long, but for now I want to tell you what happens when socialism or whatever you wish to call it, is deployed in an attempt to correct the perceived economic (or “social”) injustices of the world.

    The socialist methods deployed to supposedly achieve a better world unleash an AVALANCHE of negative side effects that utterly dwarfs any of their original intentions, and brings more poverty, more inequality, more injustice, less prosperity, and more misery. This is because those methods go against an essence of human nature that cannot be changed even by people with the best of intentions.

    Yes, socialism exacerbates the very problems it claims to solve.

    Disagree Dave? Then read on!

    Unintended Consequences of Socialist Policies
    There are several reasons why socialism, and specifically wealth redistribution by means of taxing the rich, does not work. All of these reasons stem from one important fact of life:

    People have a strong desire to do whatever is in their own perceived self interest!

    The following are detrimental unintended consequences of socialism that stem from the above fact and undermine everything socialism is meant to accomplish:

    Much of the money that goes to the government ends up being wasted, resulting in ineffective government programs, and less wealth for EVERYBODY.

    Many are tempted to assume that money collected by the government goes to help the poor and downtrodden. However, much of that money ends up in the hands of the rich and politically connected, those who have the most resources and ability to lobby for it.

    Socialism concentrates money and power in the hands of the government. When government grows, the greedy and corrupt don’t go away. Conversely, they now have a more powerful tool in their hands, the government itself.

    The bigger government grows the less free will you posess. Not an opinion, simply a fact. Socialism discourages free thought, ambition, entrepeneurship, business investment and true prosperity. Only consumers, corporate investments, free will and innovations create the jobs not big government.

  5. “We need politicians that care about their constituents, not those that simply want to line their own pockets tax breaks for their corrupt corporate buddies.” -Dave

    Newsflash….Politicians don’t worry about their constituents, they only worry about towing the party line. The party whip and PMO controls the MP’s not the constituents. You honestly think these political hacks truly vote their conscience in the House of Commons?

    BTW…last time I checked, all Prime Ministers in modern times were elected with far less than 50% of the popular vote. So your arqument is redundant. You will also find that many Liberals tend to be right of centre on most economic policies including former PM Paul Martin.

    As for “corporate buddies” I often distrust big business too but I distrust big government a helluva lot more.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *