http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/why-did-all-the-wests-big-centrist-parties-go-down-the-drain/article2030538/
I read this article with incredulity. Then I took a step back and said to myself I suppose the question should be allowed to be asked. After all, there are the very young who haven't lived for 40 or 50 years or more... and then there are those who's perception of Canada ends at some Eastern boundary.
In a nutshell, the major parties executed tyrannies against the west for generations epitomized in the Trudeau era, but reverberating there after. We were tag-alongs to confederation, the Johny-come-latelies: Too small and too far away to be much of a concern to the center of power in Ottawa. A region that could be ignored with little ramification to any general election.
But if that wasn't bad enough, when the west, against all odds, was able to begin to discover wealth, it was immediately exploited by the feds for its lucrative contribution to equalization, taxation and royalties. All this while receiving miserly recognition, seats, or infrastructure benefits. It was as though to build the west was to go up hill. An example of this was rail freight: always much more expensive moving west instead of east. The west could hardly agree that Trudeau and the "natural governing party" was a benign dictatorship. Instead we were the lackeys of the east, the "hewer of wood" and "drawer of water" for our eastern masters. From the perspective of the victims, it was a sort of indentured servitude. That was what a "Centrist" government gave us.
Revolutions in the history of man have employed the politics of both the left and right, but few have been as non-violent as the western revolution. Sure it has been painted as being right wing. But if it really is right wing, it is a compassionate right wing--one that is concerned enough to care for universal health, the plight of the poor, of victims, and a healthy society (inherently a socialist ideal).
To close, let me paint this picture: Imagine a child's teeter-totter, (if they exist any more): Two wings balanced by a fulcrum. Some people think balance, is found by moving from the outer extremes to the center. Others are centrist by embracing both "extremes" thereby discovering a center that is a far bigger place.
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Points on Senate debate
Agreed welcome to the world of selective democracy Alice in Wonderland style. Select what you don't like and label it "anti-democratic"; some will buy into it right away.
Others have the ability to look beyond the obtuse and recognize that the constitution is actually NOT undemocratic.
_____________________________________
You are exactly right on Jimmie, don't despair of the message. In any debate, when the discourse descends to calling names, making attributions, and unsubstantiated allegations, you know immediately what side has lost.
The constitution remains the face of our democracy. The constitution proscribes the make up of the senate and how it is constituted. That Mr. Layton should suggest this is undemocratic shows either a lack of credibility on his part, disingenuity, or out and out silliness.
The appointment of senators have been in the cross hairs of the party forever. However, and Mr Layton knows, the resistance to senate reform by Liberal senators precluded progress, and while the government was in minority, the committee blockade the NDP was aparty to made it impossible. What is galling is the idea Canadians really didn't understand what was really going on. Maybe many really don't know given these comments today. Senate reform will come. It will be seen in the next 4 years. Or the Conservatives haven't a chance of being re-elected. Until then, cut the government enough slack to get the job done!
_____________________________
"The people" did not reject these candidates. The voters in a riding, are not the voters of the nation. They are a part of it, but to pretend the speak for the cosmic Canadian voter is ridiculous. Candidates who were deemed worthy by their party, and who were willing to even vacate a cushy senate seat to run in hard ridings would be so rewarded by any party. Come on wake up and smell the roses people and actually think this thing through.
__________________________
This is true, but hardly establishes reform. Without constitutional amendment, reform would last until the next Prime minister.
__________________________
Erm, because Canadians understand there has to be an appropriate process of acquired majorities in both houses in order to see this through. There are several retirements coming up that could screw things up if a bill was stuck on the horns of it.
________________________
chevelle, Think about it for a second. "The people" did not reject these candidates. The voters in a riding, are not the voters of the nation. They are a part of it, but to pretend they speak for the cosmic Canadian voter is ridiculous.
Candidates who were deemed worthy by their party, and who were willing to even vacate a cushy senate seat to run in hard ridings would be so rewarded by any party.
Come on wake up and smell the roses people and actually think this thing through!
--
Others have the ability to look beyond the obtuse and recognize that the constitution is actually NOT undemocratic.
_____________________________________
You are exactly right on Jimmie, don't despair of the message. In any debate, when the discourse descends to calling names, making attributions, and unsubstantiated allegations, you know immediately what side has lost.
The constitution remains the face of our democracy. The constitution proscribes the make up of the senate and how it is constituted. That Mr. Layton should suggest this is undemocratic shows either a lack of credibility on his part, disingenuity, or out and out silliness.
The appointment of senators have been in the cross hairs of the party forever. However, and Mr Layton knows, the resistance to senate reform by Liberal senators precluded progress, and while the government was in minority, the committee blockade the NDP was aparty to made it impossible. What is galling is the idea Canadians really didn't understand what was really going on. Maybe many really don't know given these comments today. Senate reform will come. It will be seen in the next 4 years. Or the Conservatives haven't a chance of being re-elected. Until then, cut the government enough slack to get the job done!
_____________________________
"The people" did not reject these candidates. The voters in a riding, are not the voters of the nation. They are a part of it, but to pretend the speak for the cosmic Canadian voter is ridiculous. Candidates who were deemed worthy by their party, and who were willing to even vacate a cushy senate seat to run in hard ridings would be so rewarded by any party. Come on wake up and smell the roses people and actually think this thing through.
__________________________
This is true, but hardly establishes reform. Without constitutional amendment, reform would last until the next Prime minister.
__________________________
Erm, because Canadians understand there has to be an appropriate process of acquired majorities in both houses in order to see this through. There are several retirements coming up that could screw things up if a bill was stuck on the horns of it.
________________________
chevelle, Think about it for a second. "The people" did not reject these candidates. The voters in a riding, are not the voters of the nation. They are a part of it, but to pretend they speak for the cosmic Canadian voter is ridiculous.
Candidates who were deemed worthy by their party, and who were willing to even vacate a cushy senate seat to run in hard ridings would be so rewarded by any party.
Come on wake up and smell the roses people and actually think this thing through!
--
Senate Appointments May 2011.
The constitution remains the face of our democracy. The constitution proscribes the make up of the senate and how it is constituted. That Mr. Layton should suggest this is undemocratic shows either a lack of credibility on his part, disingenuity, or out and out silliness.
The appointment of senators have been in the cross hairs of the party forever. However, and Mr Layton knows, the resistance to senate reform by Liberal senators precluded progress, and while the government was in minority, the committee blockade the NDP was aparty to made it impossible. What is galling is the idea Canadians really didn't understand what was really going on. Maybe many really don't know given these comments today. Senate reform will come. It will be seen in the next 4 years. Or the Conservatives haven't a chance of being re-elected. Until then, cut the government enough slack to get the job done
The appointment of senators have been in the cross hairs of the party forever. However, and Mr Layton knows, the resistance to senate reform by Liberal senators precluded progress, and while the government was in minority, the committee blockade the NDP was aparty to made it impossible. What is galling is the idea Canadians really didn't understand what was really going on. Maybe many really don't know given these comments today. Senate reform will come. It will be seen in the next 4 years. Or the Conservatives haven't a chance of being re-elected. Until then, cut the government enough slack to get the job done
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Monday, May 9, 2011
I am conservative, and voted for Mr. Harper last week.
I think Insite and more needs be done to be tough on crime. To be tough on crime, society needs to realize we have addicts who can't quit --most want to. To feed their addiction they commit burglary and crime on monumental scale... all to the benefit of organized crime. I think we could identify and maintain our addicts by prescription, reduce disease and take the legs out of organized crime by eliminating their sources of revenue. Its the dealers who are evil, not the addicts caught up in a web they can't get out of. However, with a prescription program, focused care can provide a way out they never would see otherwise. 20 people died in Vancouver from extra-strong heroin, that wouldn't have been in play if addicts could get it by prescription.
This would reduce net addict populations, because given there is no profit for pushers, they won't be hanging around school yards.
I think Insite and more needs be done to be tough on crime. To be tough on crime, society needs to realize we have addicts who can't quit --most want to. To feed their addiction they commit burglary and crime on monumental scale... all to the benefit of organized crime. I think we could identify and maintain our addicts by prescription, reduce disease and take the legs out of organized crime by eliminating their sources of revenue. Its the dealers who are evil, not the addicts caught up in a web they can't get out of. However, with a prescription program, focused care can provide a way out they never would see otherwise. 20 people died in Vancouver from extra-strong heroin, that wouldn't have been in play if addicts could get it by prescription.
This would reduce net addict populations, because given there is no profit for pushers, they won't be hanging around school yards.
Friday, May 6, 2011
PM and Micro Management
Irene Zee wrote, in response to Alethia:
Very well said.
Thank You.
And that goes not only for PM Harper, but for all leaders in all employment.
Link to comment: http://disq.us/1qtxkq
Alethia wrote:
To think that the PM can micro-manage the government of Canada is absurd.The PMO has delegated responsibilities for this sort of thing. Apparently, it was an RCM{P member who slipped up. To fail to realize the PMO operates on the absolute necessity of delegated responsibility is either intellectual dishonesty, or ignorance.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
More left-right correction of Nazism.
Joey's right. The nazis declared themselves socialists till its last breath. Recent, populist publications erroneously redefined Nazism as right wing. Thereby causing people like yourself to have the wrong idea of it at all, and worse to use the Nazi label indiscriminately when ever you don't like some body.
Is Canada really a Democracy?
Canada is a country of mini-elections. Each producing a MP of the party favored by the constituency itself. It is better in some regards to the US, where in their presidential electorate the actual voters are the Collage of Voters.
Our MP won with 70% of the popular vote. It wouldn't be fair for our choice to move 24% of the votes cast to some other part of the country.
Democracy in Canada is not some big monolith, rather, its strength is in the layering of democracy. That starts at a ballot box, an MP, a PM, a senator... yes even senators... they are appointed by an elected man. And then the senate layers another democracy via their contemplation wisdom and ultimately voting.
Our MP won with 70% of the popular vote. It wouldn't be fair for our choice to move 24% of the votes cast to some other part of the country.
Democracy in Canada is not some big monolith, rather, its strength is in the layering of democracy. That starts at a ballot box, an MP, a PM, a senator... yes even senators... they are appointed by an elected man. And then the senate layers another democracy via their contemplation wisdom and ultimately voting.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Crossing swords in the G&M.
It is hard being brought up short--and find you need to rethink your reasoning to find the flaw that led you here.
However despite that, it is your right as a Canadian to vote as you wish. You might start by re-examining your assumptions: "...can count on to
put our interests above their own greed and avarice?" it is clear your are quite sanctimonious in your opinion MPs are in politics for greed and avarice. As if at least some of them weren't for making a positive difference to the country they love.
Your note is replete with this sort of intellectual flaccidity. I don't post on every rant that scales this page, but I paused to respond because at least you sounded like you *want* to be reasonable.
However despite that, it is your right as a Canadian to vote as you wish. You might start by re-examining your assumptions: "...can count on to
put our interests above their own greed and avarice?" it is clear your are quite sanctimonious in your opinion MPs are in politics for greed and avarice. As if at least some of them weren't for making a positive difference to the country they love.
Your note is replete with this sort of intellectual flaccidity. I don't post on every rant that scales this page, but I paused to respond because at least you sounded like you *want* to be reasonable.
Mr. Harper is not Mr. Personality. He comes across stuffy, he's over-weight, he wears a toupee, and he was born with his eyes looking funny.
When it comes right down to running the country, how many of the above "qualities" have anything to do with it?
Considering the global melt-down of the past several years, Canada's success is next to miraculous. He has managed minority governments longer than any other PM. That was the hand he was dealt, and look how he handled it. Look how much under budget we came in last year... unreportedly 14Billion. We will retire this deficit on schedule.
In my view they have earned the right to a majority government. We gave him minorities because we were afraid of some secret agenda. We were told to fear it because the pundits, and the parties told us to.
He isn't scary. He's a pudgy hockey-dad with a stroke of political genius.
________________________
@apr27: You have a case of sour grapes. Your condescension, claiming greater intellect, reason, and superiority.
Some sort of omniscience would be required to have knowledge of the conversations and debate that happened around that table. Who knew what sort of concerns around democratic principles occurred?
So forgive me when I sound patronizing. The Globe has been endorsing in electoral races since the 1880s. Its what it does. It is clear you are upset, not because of their "craven drivel" but because simply they chose differently than you have. I probably would have too, but I would have admitted it. I come from a conservative point of view. I know that, yet I still try to understand the contentions of the other parties even though I might inevitably disagree with them. I have taken positions therefore that differ from the Conservative party. The digital rights medium legislation doesn't sit right with me, and I have no problem saying so. Surely people of any political persuasion give voice to differing opinion. Surely they aren't stuck on the talking points. Perhaps I am mistaken.
In reporting, there are several modes of writing an article. Investigative reporting is supposed to be neutral. The conclusion, a product of the facts. Editorials are not that!
To expect them to be a regurgitation of public opinion is a revolting thought. Any media has personalities writing editorials that reveal their bent. That is clear to see, but I still read opinion from the left. For me, I need to understand it, to see if I can compromise in some way. The G&M has done that, and I appreciate it.
When it comes right down to running the country, how many of the above "qualities" have anything to do with it?
Considering the global melt-down of the past several years, Canada's success is next to miraculous. He has managed minority governments longer than any other PM. That was the hand he was dealt, and look how he handled it. Look how much under budget we came in last year... unreportedly 14Billion. We will retire this deficit on schedule.
In my view they have earned the right to a majority government. We gave him minorities because we were afraid of some secret agenda. We were told to fear it because the pundits, and the parties told us to.
He isn't scary. He's a pudgy hockey-dad with a stroke of political genius.
________________________
@apr27: You have a case of sour grapes. Your condescension, claiming greater intellect, reason, and superiority.
Some sort of omniscience would be required to have knowledge of the conversations and debate that happened around that table. Who knew what sort of concerns around democratic principles occurred?
So forgive me when I sound patronizing. The Globe has been endorsing in electoral races since the 1880s. Its what it does. It is clear you are upset, not because of their "craven drivel" but because simply they chose differently than you have. I probably would have too, but I would have admitted it. I come from a conservative point of view. I know that, yet I still try to understand the contentions of the other parties even though I might inevitably disagree with them. I have taken positions therefore that differ from the Conservative party. The digital rights medium legislation doesn't sit right with me, and I have no problem saying so. Surely people of any political persuasion give voice to differing opinion. Surely they aren't stuck on the talking points. Perhaps I am mistaken.
In reporting, there are several modes of writing an article. Investigative reporting is supposed to be neutral. The conclusion, a product of the facts. Editorials are not that!
To expect them to be a regurgitation of public opinion is a revolting thought. Any media has personalities writing editorials that reveal their bent. That is clear to see, but I still read opinion from the left. For me, I need to understand it, to see if I can compromise in some way. The G&M has done that, and I appreciate it.
Yeah, just what we need another Hugo Chavez north of the border. Think that keystone pipeline will be built? Nope.
The oilsands, and the oil we produce has been the economic engine of the economy, producing more tax revenue than any other source. The day after a Layton government, everything will start falling apart.
______________________________
At the end of the day, the Conservatives are a Fascists party and will push for a totalitarian agenda. No thanks...
1950's Psychobabble LOL!. Its now 2011 people?, the NDP will do the best they can to stay in power just like every other party does, accountable to the PEOPLE, unlike the Harper Regime...
One party takes care of the people by creating programs like Medicare...
The other party takes care of the oil companies, banks & big corporations(NOT YOU), more millions for the millionaires...
That's LEFT vs. RIGHT, take your pick & live with it.
-------------------------------
From the budget of 2009, all the governments of the world except China were spending like drunken sailors. Canada's spending was profoundly conservative in comparison. Great Britain spent 95% of its gdp, the US under Obama is down 4.5 trillion. It may be hard to understand these numbers so lets make it simple, if Canada had spent as the socialist governments did, our debt would have increased 450 Billion. I am talking NET debt.
Almost double the 519 Billion we have today after the "spending spree" of the government.
The opposition demanded a deficit stimulus. The Conservatives agreed, and indeed had to comply, since they were in a minority situation
http://montreal.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110429/mtl_postcript_110429/20110429/?hub=MontrealHome
The oilsands, and the oil we produce has been the economic engine of the economy, producing more tax revenue than any other source. The day after a Layton government, everything will start falling apart.
______________________________
CDNGP
A poster on the G@M said:At the end of the day, the Conservatives are a Fascists party and will push for a totalitarian agenda. No thanks...
1950's Psychobabble LOL!. Its now 2011 people?, the NDP will do the best they can to stay in power just like every other party does, accountable to the PEOPLE, unlike the Harper Regime...
One party takes care of the people by creating programs like Medicare...
The other party takes care of the oil companies, banks & big corporations(NOT YOU), more millions for the millionaires...
That's LEFT vs. RIGHT, take your pick & live with it.
Alethia
This comment has been removed from our system.
This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alethia. Show Details
It is either disingenuous or profoundly ignorant for you to Label Mr. Harper a fascist. We all know the emotion that tired word is supposed to evoke, but its almost lost all meaning. Meant to elicit visions of another Hitler, actually the opposite would be true: Hitlers Nazi-ism was a form of socialism. Look up the name of the party Hitler led.
If anything we have to fear is a populist socialist leader rising to power in Canada.
Or, Like Bernard Shaw said in the 1960s, the term "fascist" has ceased to have any meaning in the English language.
My recommendation drop the label it doesn't work any more, and elicits the opposite reaction we know you desire, and makes you look silly.
If anything we have to fear is a populist socialist leader rising to power in Canada.
Or, Like Bernard Shaw said in the 1960s, the term "fascist" has ceased to have any meaning in the English language.
My recommendation drop the label it doesn't work any more, and elicits the opposite reaction we know you desire, and makes you look silly.
_________________________
Allan smithee said:
The 'Tories' on the other hand,have been spending like drunken sailors,they pissed away years of billion dollar deficits and gave us our biggest deficit of $40 billion and a staggering debt of $519 billion dollar debt.I think you have forgotten one or two things that would bring things into focus for you:-------------------------------
From the budget of 2009, all the governments of the world except China were spending like drunken sailors. Canada's spending was profoundly conservative in comparison. Great Britain spent 95% of its gdp, the US under Obama is down 4.5 trillion. It may be hard to understand these numbers so lets make it simple, if Canada had spent as the socialist governments did, our debt would have increased 450 Billion. I am talking NET debt.
Almost double the 519 Billion we have today after the "spending spree" of the government.
The opposition demanded a deficit stimulus. The Conservatives agreed, and indeed had to comply, since they were in a minority situation
http://montreal.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110429/mtl_postcript_110429/20110429/?hub=MontrealHome
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Globe and Mail Posts, April 28
Good points Lorne, not that the fanatics will let up in their dreaming. In fact, you answered a number of my concerns. I would be happier with a couple more points, but you are right this really is a regional thing.
I agree that the message the conservatives wanted to talk about changed. Even though Canada walked on water through the worst economic melt-down since the Great Depression, that is I am sorry to say, yesterday's news apparently. They should have demonstrated a bit more flexibility on health-care and pension reform. I think they were trying to wrest the conversation to their key talking points.
I am not sure I wish a Kim Campbell on the Liberals though. It may happen with good reason. But I fear that would make the vote on the left too lop-sided. Maybe not, Kim Campbel only got 2 seats, but the party was a very strong second in most ridings, and that didn't translate into seats. We could see the same happen to the NDP to some extent.
__________________________
Its interesting the desperation to, by any means, deflect the campaign issues away from the Economy. It is bizarre to think Canada sailed through the most brutal recession since the Great Depression, and then we forgot about it.
________________________
NDP stating the youth vote is going to sweep them into power and sweep away the "bad" Conservatives.
Well, I give the youth more credit. They can think, and if they are too young to remember, they can look it up.
The deficit spending was demanded by the opposition.
The Conservatives in minority, offered that deficit budget up in order to make parliament work, knowing full well they were going to be blamed for it later.
That's politics: Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.
Since there so many of us oldsters that are stuck in our ways, at least the youth can take a good look at it. Free of prejudicial manipulation? Well, one can hope.
_____________________________
"its the governments fault for not lowering ltrs/100km. /efficiency."
Ha! Blame the government for the cars we choose to drive! That's it! Brilliant!
_________________________-__
Ok. listen carefully, prices at the pump are linked to the world wide price of oil, which a year ago was about 80.00. Today its 120.00 (112-125). If your input costs go up 50% what happens at the other end?
However. Governments add taxes and royalties, it has been static for decades.
The point being made, is that on TOP of the taxes and royalties we already pay, Jack intends to add effective tax. In BC the Libs put that on us, and we are still mad about it. For the NDP to take a whack at us too in BC, would be par for the course as far as I am concerned, and every dang BC'r that is deciding to vote NDP is going to deserve it.______________________
Delete
____________________________
As a conservative, I take offense at the statement NDP supports welfare moms and uneducated trash.
While I may think the NDP has a track record of destroying economies. I think that comment a bit below the belt. I would like to think conservatives care about welfare trash and the uneducated in this country as well.
________________________
If Jack is the leader then we are lemmings.
__________________________
And I quote:
"Only Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party have shown the leadership, the bullheadedness (let's call it what it is) and the discipline this country needs. He has built the Conservatives into arguably the only truly national party, and during his five years in office has demonstrated strength of character, resolve and a desire to reform. Canadians take Mr. Harper's successful stewardship of the economy for granted, which is high praise. He has not been the scary character portrayed by the opposition; with some exceptions, his government has been moderate and pragmatic." - Globe and Mail
_________________________-
Wow I haven't seen those talking points for a few days.
You want to see Senate Reform? Elect a Majority Conservative government. That's the only way.
It would be ridiculous to think a minority could pull something like that off.
Election dates law does not preempt the constitution which says if the government loses the confidence of the house, the GG usually calls an election. That is why. I don't get how people don't get that.
Then they have the audacity to flaunt their abject ignorance and say these are examples of Harper lying
____________________________________
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/04/28/lorne-gunter-the-impressive-ndp-surge-wont-stop-a-tory-majority/
Good points Lorne, not that the fanatics will let up in their dreaming. In fact, you answered a number of my concerns. I would be happier with a couple more points, but you are right this really is a regional thing.
I agree that the message the conservatives wanted to talk about changed. Even though Canada walked on water through the worst economic melt-down since the Great Depression, that is I am sorry to say, yesterday's news apparently. They should have demonstrated a bit more flexibility on health-care and pension reform. I think they were trying to wrest the conversation to their key talking points.
I am not sure I wish a Kim Campbell on the Liberals though. It may happen with good reason. But I fear that would make the vote on the left too lop-sided. Maybe not, Kim Campbel only got 2 seats, but the party was a very strong second in most ridings, and that didn't translate into seats. We could see the same happen to the NDP to some extent.
I agree that the message the conservatives wanted to talk about changed. Even though Canada walked on water through the worst economic melt-down since the Great Depression, that is I am sorry to say, yesterday's news apparently. They should have demonstrated a bit more flexibility on health-care and pension reform. I think they were trying to wrest the conversation to their key talking points.
I am not sure I wish a Kim Campbell on the Liberals though. It may happen with good reason. But I fear that would make the vote on the left too lop-sided. Maybe not, Kim Campbel only got 2 seats, but the party was a very strong second in most ridings, and that didn't translate into seats. We could see the same happen to the NDP to some extent.
__________________________
Its interesting the desperation to, by any means, deflect the campaign issues away from the Economy. It is bizarre to think Canada sailed through the most brutal recession since the Great Depression, and then we forgot about it.
________________________
NDP stating the youth vote is going to sweep them into power and sweep away the "bad" Conservatives.
Well, I give the youth more credit. They can think, and if they are too young to remember, they can look it up.
The deficit spending was demanded by the opposition.
The Conservatives in minority, offered that deficit budget up in order to make parliament work, knowing full well they were going to be blamed for it later.
That's politics: Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.
Since there so many of us oldsters that are stuck in our ways, at least the youth can take a good look at it. Free of prejudicial manipulation? Well, one can hope.
_____________________________
"its the governments fault for not lowering ltrs/100km. /efficiency."
Ha! Blame the government for the cars we choose to drive! That's it! Brilliant!
_________________________-__
Ok. listen carefully, prices at the pump are linked to the world wide price of oil, which a year ago was about 80.00. Today its 120.00 (112-125). If your input costs go up 50% what happens at the other end?
However. Governments add taxes and royalties, it has been static for decades.
The point being made, is that on TOP of the taxes and royalties we already pay, Jack intends to add effective tax. In BC the Libs put that on us, and we are still mad about it. For the NDP to take a whack at us too in BC, would be par for the course as far as I am concerned, and every dang BC'r that is deciding to vote NDP is going to deserve it.______________________
Alethia
This comment has been removed from our system.
This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alethia. Show Details
Good question:
Compare to the US, Canada 50B, US 4.5Trillion.
Canada's debt would have increased 450B! Not 50.
(Canada's total national debt is 561B in TOTAL)
Compare with England under the Labour party: Deficit at 95% of gdp. Canada's is 6.6% atm.
All over the world, Left Wing governments destroy their economies!
Compare to the US, Canada 50B, US 4.5Trillion.
Canada's debt would have increased 450B! Not 50.
(Canada's total national debt is 561B in TOTAL)
Compare with England under the Labour party: Deficit at 95% of gdp. Canada's is 6.6% atm.
All over the world, Left Wing governments destroy their economies!
Delete____________________________
As a conservative, I take offense at the statement NDP supports welfare moms and uneducated trash.
While I may think the NDP has a track record of destroying economies. I think that comment a bit below the belt. I would like to think conservatives care about welfare trash and the uneducated in this country as well.
________________________
If Jack is the leader then we are lemmings.
__________________________
And I quote:
"Only Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party have shown the leadership, the bullheadedness (let's call it what it is) and the discipline this country needs. He has built the Conservatives into arguably the only truly national party, and during his five years in office has demonstrated strength of character, resolve and a desire to reform. Canadians take Mr. Harper's successful stewardship of the economy for granted, which is high praise. He has not been the scary character portrayed by the opposition; with some exceptions, his government has been moderate and pragmatic." - Globe and Mail
_________________________-
Wow I haven't seen those talking points for a few days.
You want to see Senate Reform? Elect a Majority Conservative government. That's the only way.
It would be ridiculous to think a minority could pull something like that off.
Election dates law does not preempt the constitution which says if the government loses the confidence of the house, the GG usually calls an election. That is why. I don't get how people don't get that.
Then they have the audacity to flaunt their abject ignorance and say these are examples of Harper lying
____________________________________
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/04/28/lorne-gunter-the-impressive-ndp-surge-wont-stop-a-tory-majority/
Good points Lorne, not that the fanatics will let up in their dreaming. In fact, you answered a number of my concerns. I would be happier with a couple more points, but you are right this really is a regional thing.
I agree that the message the conservatives wanted to talk about changed. Even though Canada walked on water through the worst economic melt-down since the Great Depression, that is I am sorry to say, yesterday's news apparently. They should have demonstrated a bit more flexibility on health-care and pension reform. I think they were trying to wrest the conversation to their key talking points.
I am not sure I wish a Kim Campbell on the Liberals though. It may happen with good reason. But I fear that would make the vote on the left too lop-sided. Maybe not, Kim Campbel only got 2 seats, but the party was a very strong second in most ridings, and that didn't translate into seats. We could see the same happen to the NDP to some extent.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Toronto sun rants.
I am getting tired answering these talking points over and over and over again.
And I don't want to run down this list again and again. Stop copy/pasting and think for yourself for a minute.
As a PM, when you have a signed memorandum of understanding, we get 65 jets for 75 million a piece, how can it be a lie to go with the signed document over rumor? These new cost estimates appeared out of nowhere the past 3 weeks. The old ones included maintenance costs for 30 years for pete's sake. Can you ever remember a military purchase that included maintenance? You sign an agreement for sale for a new car, ordered from the factory. The next day your neighbor tells you he hears that the dealership is going to jack the price by 300%. What are you going to believe? The signed memorandum of understanding, or the neighbor's rumor? Every single one of your talking points has been answered and debunked repeatedly by anyone with a memory or working knowledge. I could copy and paste arguments I have made, thought out myself to rebut every point, but you obviously copy/pasted off another web site to raise these tired issues for the umpteenth time. I could post those, but then I wouldn't want you or the editor to think I am merely spamming
___________________________________
Lies? All I see are innuendos. The only issue that isn't outright baseless is the income trust reversal. And on that one, I think it was a necessary change in direction the FM & PM had to make.
___________________________________
And I don't want to run down this list again and again. Stop copy/pasting and think for yourself for a minute.
As a PM, when you have a signed memorandum of understanding, we get 65 jets for 75 million a piece, how can it be a lie to go with the signed document over rumor? These new cost estimates appeared out of nowhere the past 3 weeks. The old ones included maintenance costs for 30 years for pete's sake. Can you ever remember a military purchase that included maintenance? You sign an agreement for sale for a new car, ordered from the factory. The next day your neighbor tells you he hears that the dealership is going to jack the price by 300%. What are you going to believe? The signed memorandum of understanding, or the neighbor's rumor? Every single one of your talking points has been answered and debunked repeatedly by anyone with a memory or working knowledge. I could copy and paste arguments I have made, thought out myself to rebut every point, but you obviously copy/pasted off another web site to raise these tired issues for the umpteenth time. I could post those, but then I wouldn't want you or the editor to think I am merely spamming
___________________________________
Lies? All I see are innuendos. The only issue that isn't outright baseless is the income trust reversal. And on that one, I think it was a necessary change in direction the FM & PM had to make.
___________________________________
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
The kill ratio of a stealth fighter against an F-18/15/16 is 108:0.
Yes the tech makes that much difference.
The paradox of war and peace from a Canadian view:
Bosnia: should we have sat on our thumbs watching genocide? Even after Rwanda
You have a signed agreement for a new Car. The next day your neighbor comes over and says he heard the dealership is going to crank your price up 20,000.00.
Who you gonna believe?
Got 350 Billion in your jeans? No one country can afford to R&D and build planes like these at this time. I don't think Canadians would like to add 75% on to the national debt.
Actually an MOU is a contract. It is not a letter of intent, that was an earlier staged agreement.
If one party changes the prices or swaps the goods the other can walk without penalty if they want to
Yes the tech makes that much difference.
The paradox of war and peace from a Canadian view:
Bosnia: should we have sat on our thumbs watching genocide? Even after Rwanda
You have a signed agreement for a new Car. The next day your neighbor comes over and says he heard the dealership is going to crank your price up 20,000.00.
Who you gonna believe?
Got 350 Billion in your jeans? No one country can afford to R&D and build planes like these at this time. I don't think Canadians would like to add 75% on to the national debt.
Actually an MOU is a contract. It is not a letter of intent, that was an earlier staged agreement.
If one party changes the prices or swaps the goods the other can walk without penalty if they want to
Hmm, safer Canadian streets, where criminals with 20 convictions are actually tucked away in jail instead of doing drive-bys. Where rapists and child molesters are not released early because of over crowding problems. Or are released after 1/3 their sentence. Where the prisons themselves are not falling down. Where prisoners actually have their own cells instead of bunking in the gym. No, the prisons thing has a lot going for it if one cares to scratch the surface.
On the Jets, Canada's MOE commits it to 4.875 Billion for 65 planes (75mx65). The government added a few billion for cost over runs and came to 8.9. These are purchase price costs. Not with 30 years of maintenance built in. Kevin Page's 30 B number not only includes maintenance for 30 years, it costs it out in 30 year dollars.
In other words 30 years from 2016, looking back we will have spent 30 Billion. Given costs of inflation, depreciation of the dollar, that would be in line with reasonable argument. But for all these arm-chair generals to pontificate and pass judgment on whether the government is telling the truth is just silly. Educate yourself before joining in the howling at the moon
Certainly this program's costs are escalating. The original price was in the low 40 millions. However to bear down on this deal, in frank, legal terms the memorandum of understanding put the price of each plane at 75 million. Which equals a surprisingly low 4.875 Billion. The government allowed several extra billions for over runs to 8.9 B.
But this is the purchase price. It certainly doesn't presume to predict maintenance costs for 30 years! Do you buy 20 years of maintenance when you buy your car?
Of course not. Kevin Page's 30B estimate not only tries to make such a projection, but looks at it with 30 year dollars. In other words 30 years after delivery the total cost might be 30B. Well.... do the shakey math. Is that too hard to buy? It certainly doesn't reflect on our purchase costs. These planes fly at about 50,000.00 per hour. How many hours will we put on these planes in 30 years? How many theaters of war did we predict 30 years ago? Bosnia? Afghanistan? Iraq 1? Libya? How many hours have we flown in those engagements?
I would wish for 30 years of real peace. But a military cannot plan for that.
The R&D on this project is 350 Billion. Want that added to our national debt? That might do it.
Why does no one bother to do the math. What is 65 fighters times 75 million each? 4.8 Billion Dollars. The feds indicated they allotted 8.9 Billion last summer. The difference between the two totals is multiple billions. As frustrating as it is to have no-it-all posters on this board, its worse that this is nursed along by the CBC.
_________________________________________
Price of 65 planes at 75 million each equals 4.875 Billion
Released Costs including contingency: 8.9 Billion
____________
4.425 Billion difference.
On the Jets, Canada's MOE commits it to 4.875 Billion for 65 planes (75mx65). The government added a few billion for cost over runs and came to 8.9. These are purchase price costs. Not with 30 years of maintenance built in. Kevin Page's 30 B number not only includes maintenance for 30 years, it costs it out in 30 year dollars.
In other words 30 years from 2016, looking back we will have spent 30 Billion. Given costs of inflation, depreciation of the dollar, that would be in line with reasonable argument. But for all these arm-chair generals to pontificate and pass judgment on whether the government is telling the truth is just silly. Educate yourself before joining in the howling at the moon
Certainly this program's costs are escalating. The original price was in the low 40 millions. However to bear down on this deal, in frank, legal terms the memorandum of understanding put the price of each plane at 75 million. Which equals a surprisingly low 4.875 Billion. The government allowed several extra billions for over runs to 8.9 B.
But this is the purchase price. It certainly doesn't presume to predict maintenance costs for 30 years! Do you buy 20 years of maintenance when you buy your car?
Of course not. Kevin Page's 30B estimate not only tries to make such a projection, but looks at it with 30 year dollars. In other words 30 years after delivery the total cost might be 30B. Well.... do the shakey math. Is that too hard to buy? It certainly doesn't reflect on our purchase costs. These planes fly at about 50,000.00 per hour. How many hours will we put on these planes in 30 years? How many theaters of war did we predict 30 years ago? Bosnia? Afghanistan? Iraq 1? Libya? How many hours have we flown in those engagements?
I would wish for 30 years of real peace. But a military cannot plan for that.
The R&D on this project is 350 Billion. Want that added to our national debt? That might do it.
Why does no one bother to do the math. What is 65 fighters times 75 million each? 4.8 Billion Dollars. The feds indicated they allotted 8.9 Billion last summer. The difference between the two totals is multiple billions. As frustrating as it is to have no-it-all posters on this board, its worse that this is nursed along by the CBC.
_________________________________________
Price of 65 planes at 75 million each equals 4.875 Billion
Released Costs including contingency: 8.9 Billion
____________
4.425 Billion difference.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Helen in many respects I agree with you. In terms of educational credentials, Mr. Ignatieff has it made. This election, I suppose like most elections have staggering amounts of spin. I need to point out however, that the Liberals have had no problem spinning a story. The problem they have is with people buying it. Take for example the "Contempt of Parliament" motion that was what brought down the government. Canadians read the spin on that right away; they knew that was a poor joke of an excuse to try to smear the Conservatives by the power of the opposition, who in a minority government hold the balance of power. Perhaps after so many elections, one after another, Canadians are used to reading the spin...
__________________________________
Johnyblog on the Globe and Mail:
"...“It’s my country,” he said. He then paused, ban@ed the table and repeated himself, before saying that he was tired of talking about this subject. ..."
(interestingly I had to change the "g" to an "@" because the Globe filter doesn't like 'ban@ed' ha ha (even though it's a cut and paste from their own story....kind of Big Brother..).
So you lefties say Harper is aggressive and angry and dictatorial? All I have seen for this entire campaign from the Liberals is aggression and anger. The entire contempt motion was unnecessary and fueled by partisan anger. While Canada struggles and people need jobs and stability..all you Liberals can think about is how to get back the power you lost.
Well keep dreaming... Canadians figured you out. They figured out that your manipulative little mini-scandals were nothing but partisan nonsense. They figured out that your spin on Harper's personality was nothing but partisan nonsense (because you knew he was clean so had to invent a reason for people to dislike him). They figured out that the Tory ads are true...Ignatieff is an emigrant enticed to participate in Canadian politics because he arrogantly believed he was a marketable product (not because he loves this country). Your whole strategy (all of it) from start to finish..from detainees, to prorogue, to contempt motions, even having the Globe on your bandwagon spinning away during the election..all of it BACKFIRED.. No one bought any of it. Looks like Canadians aren't the gullible colonial sheep you thought they were ay count Iggy? Go back to the USA where you belong
__________________________________
Johnyblog on the Globe and Mail:
"...“It’s my country,” he said. He then paused, ban@ed the table and repeated himself, before saying that he was tired of talking about this subject. ..."
(interestingly I had to change the "g" to an "@" because the Globe filter doesn't like 'ban@ed' ha ha (even though it's a cut and paste from their own story....kind of Big Brother..).
So you lefties say Harper is aggressive and angry and dictatorial? All I have seen for this entire campaign from the Liberals is aggression and anger. The entire contempt motion was unnecessary and fueled by partisan anger. While Canada struggles and people need jobs and stability..all you Liberals can think about is how to get back the power you lost.
Well keep dreaming... Canadians figured you out. They figured out that your manipulative little mini-scandals were nothing but partisan nonsense. They figured out that your spin on Harper's personality was nothing but partisan nonsense (because you knew he was clean so had to invent a reason for people to dislike him). They figured out that the Tory ads are true...Ignatieff is an emigrant enticed to participate in Canadian politics because he arrogantly believed he was a marketable product (not because he loves this country). Your whole strategy (all of it) from start to finish..from detainees, to prorogue, to contempt motions, even having the Globe on your bandwagon spinning away during the election..all of it BACKFIRED.. No one bought any of it. Looks like Canadians aren't the gullible colonial sheep you thought they were ay count Iggy? Go back to the USA where you belong
Democracy rev. 2
Mr. Harper is not charismatic, flashy or superficial. Instead, he is stable, focused and brilliant.
Having run a minority government longer than any other PM in the history of Canada has been a feat. He has used pretty much every lever of power available to him... and surprised the opposition many times with his brilliance.
The deficit is going down another 10Billioin this year, and we are tracking to have it elliminatedin a few years. The stimulus deficit spending was demanded by the opposition and few thought it would be enough. So now when they cry wolf, Canadians see right through them if they have any recollection at all.
In equal proportion, had a liberal government like Obama's government had been at the wheel, we would have added 450 Billion to the national debt. Or increased it by 75%. (the US is down 4.5 Trillion dollars atm)
If anything, the deficit is conservative. Lower than it could be--yet was quickly injected into the economy creating jobs at a time of crisis.
The Conservatives have been far more democratic than those across the floor. For Iggy to lay the charge to the contrary, in light of the very fact he was never elected into power as Liberal leader boggles my mind. No, instead it was the politburo that made that call. Sure the Conservatives have been shrewd--minority government is about survival, and survival takes all the tools a democracy gives you. That is why they deserve a term at a majority. 4 years isn't that long, but it will be a window for Canadians to see what sort of stuff the Conservatives are really made of. They have earned that much.
There may be fewer treats in the Conservative bag of promises. But at least you know they are substance, not fluff. Canadians will not be bribed with their own money Jack and Iggy!
Having run a minority government longer than any other PM in the history of Canada has been a feat. He has used pretty much every lever of power available to him... and surprised the opposition many times with his brilliance.
The deficit is going down another 10Billioin this year, and we are tracking to have it elliminatedin a few years. The stimulus deficit spending was demanded by the opposition and few thought it would be enough. So now when they cry wolf, Canadians see right through them if they have any recollection at all.
In equal proportion, had a liberal government like Obama's government had been at the wheel, we would have added 450 Billion to the national debt. Or increased it by 75%. (the US is down 4.5 Trillion dollars atm)
If anything, the deficit is conservative. Lower than it could be--yet was quickly injected into the economy creating jobs at a time of crisis.
The Conservatives have been far more democratic than those across the floor. For Iggy to lay the charge to the contrary, in light of the very fact he was never elected into power as Liberal leader boggles my mind. No, instead it was the politburo that made that call. Sure the Conservatives have been shrewd--minority government is about survival, and survival takes all the tools a democracy gives you. That is why they deserve a term at a majority. 4 years isn't that long, but it will be a window for Canadians to see what sort of stuff the Conservatives are really made of. They have earned that much.
There may be fewer treats in the Conservative bag of promises. But at least you know they are substance, not fluff. Canadians will not be bribed with their own money Jack and Iggy!
Harper Democratic?
Your premise is flawed. Mr. Harper is not charismatic, flashy or superficial. Instead, he is stable, focused and brilliant.
Having run a minority government longer than any other PM in the history of Canada has been a feat. He has used pretty much every lever of power available to him... and surprised the opposition many times with his brilliance.
The deficit is going down another 10Billioin this year, and we are tracking to have it elliminated.
The stimulus deficit spending was demanded by the opposition and few thought it would be enough. So now when they cry wolf, Canadians see right through them.
In equal proportion, had a liberal government like Obama's government had been at the wheel, we would have added 450 Billion to the national debt. Or increased it by 75%. (the US is down 4.5 Trillion dollars atm)
If anything, the deficit is conservative. Lower than it could be yet was quickly injected into the economy creating jobs at a time of crisis.
The Conservatives have been far more democratic than those across the floor. For Iggy to lay the charge in light of the very fact he was never elected into power as Liberal leader. It was the politburo that made that call. Sure the Conservatives have been shrewd--minority government is about survival, and survival takes all the tools a democracy gives you. That is why they deserve a term at a majority. 4 years isn't that long, but it will be a window for Canadians to see what sort of stuff the Conservatives are really made of.
Having run a minority government longer than any other PM in the history of Canada has been a feat. He has used pretty much every lever of power available to him... and surprised the opposition many times with his brilliance.
The deficit is going down another 10Billioin this year, and we are tracking to have it elliminated.
The stimulus deficit spending was demanded by the opposition and few thought it would be enough. So now when they cry wolf, Canadians see right through them.
In equal proportion, had a liberal government like Obama's government had been at the wheel, we would have added 450 Billion to the national debt. Or increased it by 75%. (the US is down 4.5 Trillion dollars atm)
If anything, the deficit is conservative. Lower than it could be yet was quickly injected into the economy creating jobs at a time of crisis.
The Conservatives have been far more democratic than those across the floor. For Iggy to lay the charge in light of the very fact he was never elected into power as Liberal leader. It was the politburo that made that call. Sure the Conservatives have been shrewd--minority government is about survival, and survival takes all the tools a democracy gives you. That is why they deserve a term at a majority. 4 years isn't that long, but it will be a window for Canadians to see what sort of stuff the Conservatives are really made of.
Friday, April 22, 2011
Atheism's myth
Once upon a time, people didn't believe in a land without the snow: Didn't believe it could be so hot the parkas must come off. Everyone's food was seal meat.
In contrast in places south people believed the opposite and never saw a seal. And people in between believed neither
In contrast in places south people believed the opposite and never saw a seal. And people in between believed neither
Lipstick on a Pig
Long have I said that nothing but a true renewal will allow the Liberals back into power. Like a prisoner, who was found guilty with bags of cash, who never believes that punishment is what he deserves, the Liberals have not really accepted the seriousness of adscam. They have come out of the woodshed without finding true repentance first. Too much humiliation for the proud, rightful rulers of Canada. Ignatieff could have been excellent at facilitating this renewal. Instead, he put lipstick on a pig....
Coalitoin hypocrisy?
Perhaps unlike others, these sorts of essays written in Harper's youth are not so unexpected or surprising.
In the Reform party, there was always the view of the outsider, who being shut out from key areas in central Canada was looking to do what ever they could to gain power. It wasn't as though there wasn't precedent. The Liberals and the NDP 2nd and 3rd placed in the election of 1963--formed a coalition against the conservatives. In 1925, William Lyon McKenzie King employed the technique with support of the progressives, leading to the longest term as Prime Minister of any in Canadian history.
So it would be a surprise if a politician such as Mr. Harper DID NOT think about coalition. It reminds me of that streak in human nature to suspect the worst of your neighbor for the very things you think yourself.
My perception is that this message has galvanized the right more-so than convinced the center. The center ignores the "coalition chatter" and will vote for the economic stability aspect of the Conservative platform. In fact the center can forgive a lot of little things for the stability of the essentials. This is why Mr. Harper appears like Teflon.
In the final analysis, the age-old Canadian adage about elections holds true: "Its the Economy, Stupid!"
In the Reform party, there was always the view of the outsider, who being shut out from key areas in central Canada was looking to do what ever they could to gain power. It wasn't as though there wasn't precedent. The Liberals and the NDP 2nd and 3rd placed in the election of 1963--formed a coalition against the conservatives. In 1925, William Lyon McKenzie King employed the technique with support of the progressives, leading to the longest term as Prime Minister of any in Canadian history.
So it would be a surprise if a politician such as Mr. Harper DID NOT think about coalition. It reminds me of that streak in human nature to suspect the worst of your neighbor for the very things you think yourself.
My perception is that this message has galvanized the right more-so than convinced the center. The center ignores the "coalition chatter" and will vote for the economic stability aspect of the Conservative platform. In fact the center can forgive a lot of little things for the stability of the essentials. This is why Mr. Harper appears like Teflon.
In the final analysis, the age-old Canadian adage about elections holds true: "Its the Economy, Stupid!"
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
A Quote from Coine;
"It is hard to quarrel with Michael Ignatieff’s analysis. Indeed, it’s unassailable. Had the opposition parties succeeded last fall in their plan to oust the Conservatives and form a coalition government in their place, the Liberal leader argues, it would have caused irreparable harm to Canadian unity. The coalition, he told a gathering in Montreal last weekend, would have “profoundly and durably divided the country.”
“There was also a question concerning the legitimacy of the coalition that troubled me,” he confided. While perfectly legal, it would nonetheless have struck many Canadians, coming so soon after an election in which the Liberals had suffered their worst defeat since Confederation, as if they and their coalition partners had “in some sense or another stolen power.”Moreover, it would have been very difficult to assure the country of the certainty and stability it needed in a time of crisis “with three partners in a formal coalition,” he said, likening it, CP reports, to a rickety three-legged stool. “That was my first doubt. I couldn’t guarantee the long-term stability of the coalition.” " by Andrew Coyne on Thursday, May 21, 2009 MacLean
“There was also a question concerning the legitimacy of the coalition that troubled me,” he confided. While perfectly legal, it would nonetheless have struck many Canadians, coming so soon after an election in which the Liberals had suffered their worst defeat since Confederation, as if they and their coalition partners had “in some sense or another stolen power.”Moreover, it would have been very difficult to assure the country of the certainty and stability it needed in a time of crisis “with three partners in a formal coalition,” he said, likening it, CP reports, to a rickety three-legged stool. “That was my first doubt. I couldn’t guarantee the long-term stability of the coalition.” " by Andrew Coyne on Thursday, May 21, 2009 MacLean
Memories & Intelligence in Canadians despite what politicans tell us.
Well Iggy, your party has cost Canadian taxpayers another billion in all the elections you have caused. Canada has said no to your party for 7 years. We are finding this... tedious. We are tired of the making of issues from non-issues.
Why should Canadians be distracted from the number one country in the world. We know you wanted to take credit for this, but it has been 5 years of consecutive Conservative government that separates Canada from the other Liberal profligate states in the world. Who would say with a straight face, the Conservative government had nothing to do with it? Deficit stimulus at the demand of the opposition parties, has been now blamed on the Conservatives. Yet, in comparison with the 4.5 trillion in deficits under Obama, our deficits would have added 450B to the national debt. Brown, before losing the election had committed Brittan to a deficit equal to 95% of GDP. No, by comparison Canada's deficit was unbelievably small.
The thing I find most insulting about all this is that it says to Canadians you are stupid. You can't remember what has happened the past 2 years. And that you think we will play fetch with any bone you seem to come up with. Go away Mr. Ignattieff, the Liberals need to go back to the wood shed for another 5 years or so.
Why should Canadians be distracted from the number one country in the world. We know you wanted to take credit for this, but it has been 5 years of consecutive Conservative government that separates Canada from the other Liberal profligate states in the world. Who would say with a straight face, the Conservative government had nothing to do with it? Deficit stimulus at the demand of the opposition parties, has been now blamed on the Conservatives. Yet, in comparison with the 4.5 trillion in deficits under Obama, our deficits would have added 450B to the national debt. Brown, before losing the election had committed Brittan to a deficit equal to 95% of GDP. No, by comparison Canada's deficit was unbelievably small.
The thing I find most insulting about all this is that it says to Canadians you are stupid. You can't remember what has happened the past 2 years. And that you think we will play fetch with any bone you seem to come up with. Go away Mr. Ignattieff, the Liberals need to go back to the wood shed for another 5 years or so.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Fairy tales
Sovereign2
This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Sovereign2. Show Details
Harper would have Canadians believe his Conservatives would
cut spending,
balance the budget,
lower corp tax rates to 15%,
maintain personal tax rates
increase health care funding,
buy 65 attack jets with no engines,
but he refuses to give his subjects any specifics on just how
all this will be funded and where the cuts will be.
Mr Harper's policy of secrecy did not work in Parliament
and will not work on Canadians
cut spending,
balance the budget,
lower corp tax rates to 15%,
maintain personal tax rates
increase health care funding,
buy 65 attack jets with no engines,
but he refuses to give his subjects any specifics on just how
all this will be funded and where the cuts will be.
Mr Harper's policy of secrecy did not work in Parliament
and will not work on Canadians
Please wait while we perform your request. 
Please wait while we perform your request.
Score: 0
Name withheld
Alethia
This comment has been removed from our system.
This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alethia. Show Details
Cut spending: means trimming 3% out of Canada's bureaucracy.
Balancing the Budget. No one noticed Canada defict dropped 14B in 2010. Keep it up and do the math.
Lower tax rates increases taxes by increasing economic activity. Ireland has a 12.5% tax rate, why is it all the countries in the world are locating "offices" there?
Maintain personal tax rates. Past action predicts future performance.
Increase health-care funding. How about start with a peace dividend. We are moving our war equipment out of Afghanistan... Grow the economy increases money available for health care investment.
Buy 65 F-35s for 8.9B payment on delivery in 2018.
Of course with engines. Man how can they make that stuff up?
And people believe Sovereign2s sh\t?
Balancing the Budget. No one noticed Canada defict dropped 14B in 2010. Keep it up and do the math.
Lower tax rates increases taxes by increasing economic activity. Ireland has a 12.5% tax rate, why is it all the countries in the world are locating "offices" there?
Maintain personal tax rates. Past action predicts future performance.
Increase health-care funding. How about start with a peace dividend. We are moving our war equipment out of Afghanistan... Grow the economy increases money available for health care investment.
Buy 65 F-35s for 8.9B payment on delivery in 2018.
Of course with engines. Man how can they make that stuff up?
And people believe Sovereign2s sh\t?
Delete
Past history predicts future performance
What to do when times are too good?
Forget it and find something else to fear.
Fear disunity?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear Healthcare?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear Economic forces?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear that our soldiers are badly equipped?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear high taxes?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear big government?
Whats the matter with you those who don't!
Forget it and find something else to fear.
Fear disunity?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear Healthcare?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear Economic forces?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear that our soldiers are badly equipped?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear high taxes?
Past history predicts future performance.
Fear big government?
Whats the matter with you those who don't!
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Poor and Rich in Canada.
The poorest in Canada is rich. I know this from raising a family of 4 on less than 10,000.00 UNDER the poverty line.
Sure we never had "toys" like other Canadians, but we knew we lived in a great country and were rich because we had each other.
I have voted Conservative, because I wanted not for myself in better welfare (paid by Canadians) but that I wanted a better country. For as good as it is, we can be better. So I voted for the 2% drop in gst tax. Not because I needed it, my gst was subsidized so I paid no gst. (truth is I made about 50.00 a paycheck.) But I voted because I thought it was best for my country not for myself. I would love to see a day Canadians paid no income taxes. The oil sands could give it to us.
I see the Conservatives best able to make us all like Saudi's. So my vote is solidly with them.
Sure we never had "toys" like other Canadians, but we knew we lived in a great country and were rich because we had each other.
I have voted Conservative, because I wanted not for myself in better welfare (paid by Canadians) but that I wanted a better country. For as good as it is, we can be better. So I voted for the 2% drop in gst tax. Not because I needed it, my gst was subsidized so I paid no gst. (truth is I made about 50.00 a paycheck.) But I voted because I thought it was best for my country not for myself. I would love to see a day Canadians paid no income taxes. The oil sands could give it to us.
I see the Conservatives best able to make us all like Saudi's. So my vote is solidly with them.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Re: The balloting at Guelf U.
Alethia
This comment has been removed from our system.
This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alethia. Show Details
With only one official democracy is severely damaged. That is how you get votes like that in Iran or Afghanistan. If there are no bona fide witnesses of its validity, who is to say the box wasn't stuffed?
Its the witness of the scrutineers that has always validated the veracity of democracy.
AlethiaIts the witness of the scrutineers that has always validated the veracity of democracy.
Iggy said: "Mr. Harper checks the facebook page..." comon... as if Mr. Harper had time to do that??
Its his kind of lies and exaggeration that make the left so dangerous.
Rest assured if this were Obama's riding and security did the same thing, you would never hear a whisper of it.
Its his kind of lies and exaggeration that make the left so dangerous.
Rest assured if this were Obama's riding and security did the same thing, you would never hear a whisper of it.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/elections-canada-validates-contested-student-ballot-in-guelph/article1986799/comments/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Resources in Afghanistan? Anyone can say 1 trillion dollars. Show me the gold and I might believe you. Sure mineral exploration has hardly ever been done, but let them find and build their mines themselves. Withdraw completely and if the Taliban come back, make the next round just a bombing run to the stone age.
stop blaming america for defending itself against your filth
However, now it has become clear that that is not true. In fact you can lie your face off to a Kufa/infidel if it will advance your supposed cause.
You lie, Prove it.
Still, there is no comparison to incidental deaths, and...
@Iraqgenocide2 Why would the US have any interest in building a pipeline to ship oil *away* from the Middle East? Obviously it is in China's interest if such a pipeline were to be desired, and definitely not the US, in fact such ideas would be rigorously opposed. It would make more sense if you went back and rearranged your story so the US was warring to try to stop a pipeline. However, Canada has enough oil to supply the US for 1000 years, so why would they bother?
__________________________