MARGARET ATWOOD: Election 2011, a dark fiction
Unsound @ Sun Apr 24, 2011 11:01 pm
RUEZ RUEZ:
This is a woman who cried a river of tears about the Sun News channel before they had broadcast a single second. You'd think an artist would be more supportive of freedom of speech.
Sadly. most "artists" on;y support liberal anti-govt type free speech. They're just as quick to silence opposers as any other political bent is... sad really.
2Cdo @ Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:45 am
Unsound Unsound:
RUEZ RUEZ:
This is a woman who cried a river of tears about the Sun News channel before they had broadcast a single second. You'd think an artist would be more supportive of freedom of speech.
Sadly. most "artists" on;y support liberal anti-govt type free speech. They're just as quick to silence opposers as any other political bent is... sad really.
Exactly what I've been saying for years!
Curtman @ Tue Apr 26, 2011 5:42 pm
Margaret Atwood: My paper napkin guide to the election
$1:
Being a writer, I write frequently. It’s a nervous habit. The other day I was writing on a paper napkin, having rashly left the house without a notebook. What I was trying to figure out was the kind of country I would like to live in, and thus the kind of party I’d vote for if it were likely to encourage such qualities.
Like many swing voters, I want to vote for values, not for labels. I don’t much care what parties call themselves or what they say they will do. I care about what they really have done, and the values they’ve demonstrated by their actions.
What I was looking for were qualities we swing voters might be able to agree on, no matter what “party” we may have voted for historically. Suppose we had a party called the Common Grounds Party, or maybe the Common Decency Party. It might begin with the list on the paper napkin. Here it is. As you can see, there are pairs of opposites.
And, since you probably can’t read my writing, this is what it says:
Like many swing voters, I want to vote for values, not for labels. I don’t much care what parties call themselves or what they say they will do. I care about what they really have done, and the values they’ve demonstrated by their actions.
What I was looking for were qualities we swing voters might be able to agree on, no matter what “party” we may have voted for historically. Suppose we had a party called the Common Grounds Party, or maybe the Common Decency Party. It might begin with the list on the paper napkin. Here it is. As you can see, there are pairs of opposites.
And, since you probably can’t read my writing, this is what it says:
Read the article for more....
Public_Domain @ Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:09 pm
She sees things very much in black and white. She doesn't realize all the gray there is... Or the blacker black and whiter white.
Her writing reads like the Liberal campaign. And she's only being talked about because she's a rich woman parroting it all.
The 'Common Grounds' party wouldn't get anything done. Man am I sick of all the flowery language, "We need a CARING leader! We need a leader who LISTENS! We need a leader who is OPEN and not a DICTATOR!"
You've never gotten that and you never will. And what you want is what's pretended by all of their campaigns. Did you enter this whole think last week, Ms. Atwood?
She suggests at the end that people 'check parties against the list'. Gee, I wonder if people more inclined to vote NDP will be more inclined to say the flowery shit applies to that party? And thus the same for the Conservatives, Liberals, Christian Alliance, Neo-Rhino Party, and Western Block Party.
You'd have to be some unusually honest fascist to say you align with the right side of the napkin.
commanderkai @ Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:12 pm
Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:
She sees things very much in black and white. She doesn't realize all the gray there is... Or the blacker black and whiter white.
Her writing reads like the Liberal campaign. And she's only being talked about because she's a rich woman parroting it all.
The 'Common Grounds' party wouldn't get anything done. Man am I sick of all the flowery language, "We need a CARING leader! We need a leader who LISTENS! We need a leader who is OPEN and not a DICTATOR!"
You've never gotten that and you never will. And what you want is what's pretended by all of their campaigns. Did you enter this whole think last week, Ms. Atwood?
She suggests at the end that people 'check parties against the list'. Gee, I wonder if people more inclined to vote NDP will be more inclined to say the flowery shit applies to that party? And thus the same for the Conservatives, Liberals, Christian Alliance, Neo-Rhino Party, and Western Block Party.
You'd have to be some unusually honest fascist to say you align with the right side of the napkin.
Her writing reads like the Liberal campaign. And she's only being talked about because she's a rich woman parroting it all.
The 'Common Grounds' party wouldn't get anything done. Man am I sick of all the flowery language, "We need a CARING leader! We need a leader who LISTENS! We need a leader who is OPEN and not a DICTATOR!"
You've never gotten that and you never will. And what you want is what's pretended by all of their campaigns. Did you enter this whole think last week, Ms. Atwood?
She suggests at the end that people 'check parties against the list'. Gee, I wonder if people more inclined to vote NDP will be more inclined to say the flowery shit applies to that party? And thus the same for the Conservatives, Liberals, Christian Alliance, Neo-Rhino Party, and Western Block Party.
You'd have to be some unusually honest fascist to say you align with the right side of the napkin.
Man, we're probably the two youth members who are politically opposed to each other in mostly every way. But, in this case, I 100% agree with you.
Who would choose "dictator" or "mean"?
Curtman @ Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:22 pm
commanderkai commanderkai:
Who would choose "dictator" or "mean"?
The guy with 1/3 of the seats in parliament who ignores the 2/3.
Gunnair @ Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:26 pm
Curtman Curtman:
Margaret Atwood: My paper napkin guide to the election
Read the article for more....
$1:
Being a writer, I write frequently. It’s a nervous habit. The other day I was writing on a paper napkin, having rashly left the house without a notebook. What I was trying to figure out was the kind of country I would like to live in, and thus the kind of party I’d vote for if it were likely to encourage such qualities.
Like many swing voters, I want to vote for values, not for labels. I don’t much care what parties call themselves or what they say they will do. I care about what they really have done, and the values they’ve demonstrated by their actions.
What I was looking for were qualities we swing voters might be able to agree on, no matter what “party” we may have voted for historically. Suppose we had a party called the Common Grounds Party, or maybe the Common Decency Party. It might begin with the list on the paper napkin. Here it is. As you can see, there are pairs of opposites.
And, since you probably can’t read my writing, this is what it says:
Like many swing voters, I want to vote for values, not for labels. I don’t much care what parties call themselves or what they say they will do. I care about what they really have done, and the values they’ve demonstrated by their actions.
What I was looking for were qualities we swing voters might be able to agree on, no matter what “party” we may have voted for historically. Suppose we had a party called the Common Grounds Party, or maybe the Common Decency Party. It might begin with the list on the paper napkin. Here it is. As you can see, there are pairs of opposites.
And, since you probably can’t read my writing, this is what it says:
Read the article for more....
$1:
Chris Selley’s Full Pundit: Harper bad. Others better. Any questions?
Comments
Twitter
LinkedIn
Email
.
Chris Selley Apr 26, 2011 – 12:26 PM ET | Last Updated: Apr 26, 2011 12:29 PM ET
Alias Pundit
With a Conservative majority looking more and more likely, the commentariat tries desperately to keep calm and carry on.
Margaret Atwood scrawls a list of nouns and adjectives on a dinner napkin, in two columns: On the right (interestingly enough) are negative leadership characteristics (“dictator,” “mean,” “always right, like God” — gee, whoever could she be talking about?) and on the left are their more desirable opposites. And … well, for some reason, she thought Canadians would be interested in her napkin. And for some reason, the Toronto Star agreed! They actually have a photo of the stupid thing! If nothing else, Atwood’s embarrassing forays into op-ed writing are proving that renowned wordsmiths can be every bit as vacuous when it comes to politics as pop musicians can. How long until she’s guest-editing The Globe and Mail, we wonder?
Comments
.
Chris Selley Apr 26, 2011 – 12:26 PM ET | Last Updated: Apr 26, 2011 12:29 PM ET
Alias Pundit
With a Conservative majority looking more and more likely, the commentariat tries desperately to keep calm and carry on.
Margaret Atwood scrawls a list of nouns and adjectives on a dinner napkin, in two columns: On the right (interestingly enough) are negative leadership characteristics (“dictator,” “mean,” “always right, like God” — gee, whoever could she be talking about?) and on the left are their more desirable opposites. And … well, for some reason, she thought Canadians would be interested in her napkin. And for some reason, the Toronto Star agreed! They actually have a photo of the stupid thing! If nothing else, Atwood’s embarrassing forays into op-ed writing are proving that renowned wordsmiths can be every bit as vacuous when it comes to politics as pop musicians can. How long until she’s guest-editing The Globe and Mail, we wonder?
Public_Domain @ Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:27 pm
No Curtman... He wouldn't.
He thinks he's open and honest and kind. Just like your Liberals do.