I'm A Loser, Bebe

I've just gone to the Toronto Star and read Graham Fraser's entire
article. It's an altogether new theory to me, that Quebec is made
up of men who are losers ... defeatists ! Yoicks.

While I think this over, I must ask the question: how is it that in this
whole, obviously thoughtful article, not once is the name of the
Roman Catholic Church mentioned? Surely the church had a grip
on the Quebec psyche like no other, from the very beginning.

Let's see. How do Canadians feel when the Americans are buying off their corporations, their natural resources and even their own people? Why do Canadians often not encourage their own artists, writers, musicians, etc... Why do many Canadians think it is so much better south of the border?
->Losers

How did First Nations people feel when their land, resources and their own people were bought? -> Losers

The "loser" syndrome is not a matter isolated to Quebec but is encountered anytime a small group must cope with the unfairness of a larger bully group trying to impose its ways through basically $, power and intimidation.



---
"We are all in this together somehow, some more than others somehow"

<p>Continuing on gaulois' thought, if nothing else, it takes courage, balls and intelligence to face up to the bully. <p> At René Lévesque's death, the entire province became quiet for a few days. One just had to take Montreal's metro at rush hour to see and hear that the mood was collected and silent. Or when after the funeral mass, when his casket reached the doors and the thousands gathered outside started shouting MERCI ! MERCI ! MERCI ! ... Was this for the life of a loser ? <p> I recall the ice storm and Lucien Bouchard's constant presence on the media, speaking and informing the population. Leadership and control under great stress is what Québécers saw. Are those the personality traits of failure ? <p> Chrétien-Mulroney-Laurier or Duceppe-Parizeau- Lévesque. If I had to choose and entrust one group of men with my national' s interest, the choice suddenly becomes clear and nobody in their right mind would voluntarily endow their trust to losers. As you may have noticed, all these men are Québécers and have also been Canadian Prime Ministers. Between the two groups, who do you think could be classified as having been colonized ? If holding power is the only way one can be recognized as having succeeded, then I guess this would make a majority of us, losers and failures. Good try for the analysis but a bit shallow. <p> But if there were any truth at all in this Québec male loser complex, it would have to try explaining why Canadians choose them as their prime ministers. <p>---<br>« Il y a une belle, une terrible rationalité dans la décision d'être libre. » - Gérard Bergeron <br />

Gaulois Quote: {The "loser" syndrome is not a matter isolated to Quebec but is encountered anytime a small group must cope with the unfairness of a larger bully group trying to impose its ways through basically $, power and intimidation.}

Gaulois, bullies are not alway large groups, but can be much smaller, like political parties.. when they are tossed into power they become quite a powerful force, they have the power to do as they feel, say what they want in our Parliament and know full well they are not touchable by the law.

To think we jail biker gangs like the Hells Angles and we put people in power to govern on our behalf and we give the the power to protect us, and when they address one another in parliament, they call one another crooks, liar and point out act of corruption, but no one is hell accountable.

So who is the real loser ?




---
Good government is not a party government

Fair comment.

---
"We are all in this together somehow, some more than others somehow"

Michou wrote:
At René Lévesque's death, the entire province became quiet for a
few days. One just had to take Montreal's metro at rush hour to see
and hear that the mood was collected and silent. Or when after the
funeral mass, when his casket reached the doors and the
thousands gathered outside started shouting MERCI ! MERCI !
MERCI ! ... Was this for the life of a loser ?
*********************************************************************
What a beautiful glimpse of Quebec life. Thank you, michou.

When this doggone Election is over and we've collected our wits
again, let us resolve to do something about the Mainstream Media
so that they show us these important scenes, and tell us our
important stories, eh? This will mean protecting CBC for starts.

How do we protect the CBC ? For christs sake we cannot even protect the starving , the homeless and our environment, how in the hell do you plan to protect something "government" / a political party has control over. THe party system fills it up with their bureaucrats to make sure that the CBC does not get to outspoken / political.

Remember CBC Disclosure with Mark Kelly , the day after he covered the story on Paul Martins CSL , the show went off the air. So how do you save something that is not in your control?

Mary Mackie have you forgotten that the CBC is not in the hands of the Liberal any longer , but is not the sheep of the Conservative party and if they want to maintain the funding level they are at now, then they better behave. That too was a trick of the liberals.

Free Society, freedom of the press, free speach .. bull poop, we are all one minute away from being stomped on by another governing party.

---
Good government is not a party government

I think most of us are 'losers' in someone else's eyes. What matters is what we are in our own.

Besides, considering some of those who might be considered 'winners' in N.A. society, maybe being a loser ain't that bad.

Besides, as one of the chief nerds in Revenge of the Nerds put it, there's 'more of us than them'.



---
"When we are in the middle of the paradigm, it is hard to imagine any other paradigm" (Adam Smith).