I don't think that my perception is too different from many other rank and file NDPers who were thrilled at Tom's first win in Quebec and the promise that it offered to get our long-sought for Quebec break-through.
That is a lot of time to catch-up but it would be helpful to know that we are much closer, in my mind, to working on winning the next 70 seats under Mulcair than we are to undertaking that same task under any one else. I do NOT accept the narative that only Mulcair can hold Quebec or that only Tom can beat Harper but I don't dismiss the polls (including the one noted in the last thread) suggesting we are talking about a Mulcair-led NDP starting from a more advantageous position in Quebec (and hence across the country).
That Harper has found the non-Quebec formula for a majority government doesn't make it a desirable strategy to emulate. Within the context of electoral politics at the Federal level, that becomes a question of electability and specifically electability in Quebec. With that as a starting point it becomes a question of who helps us advance those policies most effectively.
It always bothered me that no organized way to help those in need.I understand that my presumptions about all the candidates being markedly consistent on policy and direction is not shared by everyone but within the spectrum of Canadian Politics I am of the opionion that there really isn't that much daylight between Topp, Nash, Dewar, Ashton or Cullen or Mulcair. As I got older, I saw what HQ real policy was on that topic. Are we conciderate, not just of those who are elders, but others who are older and fragile? What about families with those with special needs? Have we thought of how we can make them feel included and loved?"edit-PS The scripture in James about not sending the poor person away cold and hungry was a scripture I loved as in the congregation I was first in it was used to mean it was the congregation members place to help one another. There will be evidence that a person is merciful.
JW PUBLIC TALK #118 FULL
(On full of mercy and good fruit) Simply agreeing with correct doctrine and doing certain deeds means we are obedient, but dose our life truly indacte we are merciful? Faith without works is dead. "Let's look at some parts of this scripture that is less discussed. fruit of righteousness sown under peaceful conditions.etc. Also in James the scripture has n simply giving well wishes to a hungry person when one could do something about it James chapter 3- the wisdom from above- chaste, peaceable, reasonable, ready to obey, full of mercy and good fruit, not making partial distinctions, not hypocritical. to look after orphans an widows in their tribulations and to keep oneself without spot from the world. And ‘explain’ it with the lame WT fairytales, making it look even worse or more impossible than before)Ī favorite talking point - (last of James chapter 1) "the form of worship. ‘Have you ever noticed that this or that doesn’t seem to be possible?’ (And then bring attention to bibleverses that show a different truth. Jehovah kills innocent children, just like Satan!) How is this different? (Of course some JW will come up with some answer, but maybe other JW will realise something they never realised before.
All the innocent firstborns of Egypt were killed by Jehovah. Some people might say that Jehovah himself killed a lot of children too, before rescueing his people from Egypt. ‘Some people might say.’ (insert actually good ex-jw reasoning that nobody ever thinks of in KH)Įxample: king Herod killed all those innocent children. Or comes up with things that should make people think. He always brings up exactly that what WT leaves out of it. In my congregation is one elder I suspect of being PIMO.