Comments on: Journalists finally join call to include Greens in debate ; OK GO

By: Saskboy

Saskboy — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:25:16 +0000

“Why is it that 2 hours is too much to ask most people to pay attention”

They don’t even sell advertising during then, as far as I recall, and the competitors don’t have anything different, so they really have very little to lose, considering it’s in the public interest. We don’t even have to ask people to pay attention; if they want to remain blissfully ignorant that’s their right in this country, as much as I disagree with their attitude. The broadcasters don’t have the right though to tell us which parties are suitable to listen to, and which aren’t.

By: Dodos

Dodos — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:00:30 +0000

ET may nbe one of the most arrogant commenters on SDA. Quite a feat if you ask me.

I think we all know the reason the NDP and Cons don’t want May on the debates. She will make Layton and Harper look like the dolts they are.

By: JimBobby

JimBobby — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 21:08:53 +0000

“…May wanted to align herself with the Liberals…”

Greens are running against Liberals in more than 300 ridings. That is no alliance. The May-Dion deal was not a merger as the Cons and NDP have been trying to paint it. May never endorsed any Liberal party policies. Dion never endorsed any Green Party policies. The deal affects 2 out of 306 ridings. Get some perspective.

By: Adrian MacNair

Adrian MacNair — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:29:00 +0000

Bah, don’t bother. Let Stephane Dion answer questions about the Green Party. After all, May wanted to align herself with the Liberals, she may as well get a red card and sit in the audience.

By: Green Assassin Brigade

Green Assassin Brigade — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:03:02 +0000

I totaly agree with the need for more, not less voices in elections, unfortunately a great deal of the electorate has neither the patience or the ambition to learn about the entire platform about the party the vote for let alone the compeating choices.

Personaly I’d like to see a round robin type debate set up where we get to see each leader spend a hour one on one with each of the others, followed by the 2 all candidates debates. As it is ratings are not what they should be for the debates, my set up would get no support and minimal viewership

Why is it that 2 hours is too much to ask most people to pay attention once every couple of years when they can spend 8 weeks on hockey playoffs?

Which is more important the future of your country or a bunch of over payed jocks who add no real value to our lives?

By: Saskboy

Saskboy — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:42:32 +0000

Thanks for the link TAG. I can’t help but feel a creative and forceful solution will be required to twist the arms of the broadcast consortium. They are undoubtedly out of touch with regular Canadians, as anyone with a TV could tell if they care to look with a critical eye. Even our “public broadcaster” can’t be bothered to air Canadian content like a series of debates at times when they have nothing else to put on anyway. It’s strange there is dead air late at night, when they could cue up tapes from shows gone by and educate or entertain people with VCR/TIVOs/insomnia. The airwaves are a public resource, and for backroom dealers to dictate which national parties can and cannot have airtime is a crime.

By: Adam

Adam — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:37:39 +0000

ET’s comments seem to be quite unreasonable, unlike Hebert, who manages to succinctly sum up the supporting arguments for May’s inclusion. Excellent post.

By: The Anonymous Green

The Anonymous Green — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:23:48 +0000

http://blog.greenparty.ca/en/node/540