Facebook exchange with some old NDP friends: Manitoba Starts a Hydro Project

• 

  Owen Abrey

  Let me then suggest a polemic exists: Wealth and Debt. Yes they are not true polemics, because they have links to each other. Another polemic might be Wealth and Poverty. Yet they too have links to each other. Political systems are cha...llenged in balancing these polemics, if you were a believer in the Hegelian dialectic, you would use "synthesizing" instead of balancing. If you were Kierkegaardian you might argue for paradoxical tension. Contrary to some opinions, various political parties have an area of concern and expertise surrounding these concepts. From the days of the CCF and Tommy Douglas, the NDP are very good at understanding poverty. The Conservatives might be thought very good at understanding business. This is not to say each is their exclusive domain, but is a positive way of approaching the differences that exist. The criticism that exists between these 2 systems are centered on the tendency of one side or the other to put their primary concern too far apart from the primary concern of the other..See More

  May 25 at 8:25pm ·
• 

  Rod Murphy This would explain why so many CCF and NDP governments have come to power and cleaned up the debts left by the various Conservative business smart governments. Just saying:)

  __________

Owen Abrey

‎:) Rod, but can you see with similar clarity how the NDP lack in many cases an understanding of wealth creation? The previous Saskatchewan NDP government excepted. Levels of debt are tolerable so long as there is the wealth (and taxation... levels) to support it. I suppose that might be asking too much, I however am a contrarian. I am not satisfied until I understand the validity of all sides of a polemic; and am a fan of Kierkegaard, so I am in no rush to resolve paradox, but am comfortable with allowing for the natural tensions of paradox to exist. Hegelians however must rush to resolve, and we in Canada tend to be Hegelian.See More

May 25 at 8:42pm ·

Owen Abrey I would like to say, I am excited about the Hydro news. It definitely is a wealth creator. Would that more of this would happen in Manitoba.

@Owen: Good lawd! With all due respect, your Hegelian dooelectric and Kierkegaard nonexistentialitizing mish-mash of obfuscation is over the top for name-dropping right-wing-nut rationalization.

Read the following article for an example of clear thinking that explains how CONservatives trash the books by shoveling the loot to their buddies and then the NDP comes in to clean up the mess. Social democrats know how to create and share the wealth. Right-wing-nuts are greedy, incompetent aholes who bring the planet to the brink of financial calamity every so often, most recently 2008.


Owen Abrey

I wrote what I wrote because I wanted to communicate that I take the debate very seriously. I have read the Star article btw. I was attempting to give the rationale for some sort of bridge-building in the debate, using an approach called...: "Appreciative Inquiry." I am sorry it seemed verbose. Most of us are unaware from whence our prejudice comes--and we all have prejudices whether we want to admit them or not. I would appreciate it if the debates proceed on a basis of respect and not condescension. I am sorry if I shot too high over head. I could make the language simpler but then I would have to write a book to say it. Thank you for allowing me to engage on these ideas Rod.

Obama Prays, Scorners Scorn.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/05/29/jopin-tornado-obama.html


Why is it when any thing is wrong its God's fault? Is it merely that disasters are commonly called "Acts of God" because God only occupies the place of disaster? While there are times He may intervene in nature, why can't nature's laws account for things like this without blaming God? God never made puppets on a string. But God is the one tugging on heart strings right now to go down and help, or pitch in a few dollars... "For in as much as you have done it* to the least of these, you have done it unto me"* (Feeding the Hungry, Thirsty, Clothing the destitute, Helping the sick)

Whether Missouri or Slave Lake, there are people who are in the worst sorts of circumstances. Lets keep them in our prayers, and do WHATEVER we can to help.
______________________

This tired tune again? The Crusades, the injustices, the Inquisition, behavior of people who called themselves "Christians". It is easy to spot the disingenuous. But to put all the world's ills at the feet of "Christians" today is classic misplaced guilt. None of us can repair the damages of our ancestors, their murders, their wars, their corruption, under the cover of political agendas.
But there are people discovered in our midst from time to time, who, out of their faith, their love for God, their hope in the face of despair, who could teach us a bit if we would listen. They may not be standing on street corners, knocking on doors, or attracting the attention of the media. Because they are busy. Busy feeding the poor, clothing children, spending their lives in many ways not for themselves, but for others.
I am a fan of Soren Kierkegaard, who refused to call himself a Christian, because he said, that was better a term others gave to you. 

___________________
 
Rendition 2
   This tired tune again?  This is the problem with labels, prejudices and attributions.  They fail to really understand, because they haven't really experienced it.  You can read about love from a novel and not have a clue about it.  Some things, like Faith, Hope, Love are only known in the experience of them.
  The Crusades, the injustices, the Inquisition, behavior of people who called (Labeled)  themselves "Christians" are smeared together over the Mother Theresas of this world. It is easy to spot the disingenuous. But to put all the world's ills at the feet of "Christians" today is to classically misplace guilt. None of us can repair the damages of our ancestors, their murders, their wars, their corruption, under the cover of *politico-religious* agendas.
  But there are people discovered in our midst from time to time, who, out of their faith, their love for God, their hope in the face of despair, who could teach us a bit if we would listen. They may not be standing on street corners, knocking on doors, or attracting the attention of the media. Because they are busy. Busy feeding the poor, clothing children, spending their lives in many ways not for themselves, but for others.
  Kierkegaard refused to call himself a Christian, because he said, that was better an attribution others made of you.

A youtube argument visa vis HST in BC.

• I came to similar opinions by asking 3 or 4 questions: How much does HST hurt someone at 25k/annum? How much does it Hurt someone who makes 1,000.000/annum. The key questions boil down to discretionary spending vs spending for survival. It is well known a single mother at 25k/annum spends almost all the 25k for food and lodging. (no HST paid) That same person receives a supplement from the government that also relates to her children.
  
  The millionaire pays 75,000.00. The portion of his income for food is negligible, the bulk of his wealth is tucked away in investments to shelter him from taxation. Millionaires are such because they have a knack for taking in far more than they part with. I don't fault that. No, I applaud wealth in BC, we all should. More net tax comes into the province when that is encouraged, and over all, wealth rises for the poor as well. A VAT becomes very hard for a rich person to avoid.
  
  Sorry. Last post: The biggest problem with your presentation, is not the facts you present. To tell someone you who's ideas you oppose to "shut the h*ll up", you shut down the debate that needs to be heard, including the valid points you raise. Freedom of speech must remain paramount. The tone is somewhat regrettable, though I suppose there is a segment of society to whom it appeals.

The Rag Man

Seeing all the efforts of my life based on my own works of insecurity,( not obedience to Christ's will) amounting to a mountian of "filthy rags"  yet after you read the story I would like to share with you a marvelous truth.You have to read the story to get the full impact of my life notes at the end.

by Walter Wangerin, Jr

I saw a strange sight. I stumbled upon a story most strange, like nothing my life, my street sense, my sly tongue had ever prepared me for. Hush, child. Hush, now, and I will tell it to you.
Even before the dawn one Friday morning I noticed a young man, handsome and strong, walking the alleys of our City. He was pulling an old cart filled with clothes both bright and new, and he was calling in a clear, tenor voice: "Rags!" Ah, the air was foul and the first light filthy to be crossed by such sweet music.
"Rags! New rags for old! I take your tired rags! Rags!"
"Now, this is a wonder," I thought to myself, for the man stood six-feet-four, and his arms were like tree limbs, hard and muscular, and his eyes flashed intelligence. Could he find no better job than this, to be a ragman in the inner city? I followed him. My curiosity drove me. And I wasn't disappointed.
Soon the Ragman saw a woman sitting on her back porch. She was sobbing into a handkerchief, sighing, and shedding a thousand tears. Her knees and elbows made a sad X. Her shoulders shook. Her heart was breaking. The Ragman stopped his cart. Quietly, he walked to the woman, stepping round tin cans, dead toys, and Pampers.
"Give me your rag," he said so gently, "and I'll give you another."
He slipped the handkerchief from her eyes. She looked up, and he laid across her palm a linen cloth so clean and new that it shined. She blinked from the gift to the giver.
Then, as he began to pull his cart again, the Ragman did a strange thing: he put her stained handkerchief to his own face; and then HE began to weep, to sob as grievously as she had done, his shoulders shaking. Yet she was left without a tear.
"This IS a wonder," I breathed to myself, and I followed the sobbing Ragman like a child who cannot turn away from mystery.
"Rags! Rags! New rags for old!"
In a little while, when the sky showed grey behind the rooftops and I could see the shredded curtains hanging out black windows, the Ragman came upon a girl whose head was wrapped in a bandage, whose eyes were empty. Blood soaked her bandage. A single line of blood ran down her cheek. Now the tall Ragman looked upon this child with pity, and he drew a lovely yellow bonnet from his cart.
"Give me your rag," he said, tracing his own line on her cheek, "and I'll give you mine."
The child could only gaze at him while he loosened the bandage, removed it, and tied it to his own head. The bonnet he set on hers. And I gasped at what I saw: for with the bandage went the wound! Against his brow it ran a darker, more substantial blood - his own!
"Rags! Rags! I take old rags!" cried the sobbing, bleeding, strong, intelligent Ragman.
The sun hurt both the sky, now, and my eyes; the Ragman seemed more and more to hurry.
"Are you going to work?" he asked a man who leaned against a telephone pole. The man shook his head.
The Ragman pressed him: "Do you have a job?"
"Are you crazy?" sneered the other. He pulled away from the pole, revealing the right sleeve of his jacket - flat, the cuff stuffed into the pocket. He had no arm.
"So," said the Ragman. "Give me your jacket, and I'll give you mine."
Such quiet authority in his voice!
The one-armed man took off his jacket. So did the Ragman - and I trembled at what I saw: for the Ragman's arm stayed in its sleeve, and when the other put it on he had two good arms, thick as tree limbs; but the Ragman had only one.
"Go to work," he said.
After that he found a drunk, lying unconscious beneath an army blanket, and old man, hunched, wizened, and sick. He took that blanket and wrapped it round himself, but for the drunk he left new clothes.
And now I had to run to keep up with the Ragman. Though he was weeping uncontrollably, and bleeding freely at the forehead, pulling his cart with one arm, stumbling for drunkenness, falling again and again, exhausted, old, old, and sick, yet he went with terrible speed. On spider's legs he skittered through the alleys of the City, this mile and the next, until he came to its limits, and then he rushed beyond.
I wept to see the change in this man. I hurt to see his sorrow. And yet I needed to see where he was going in such haste, perhaps to know what drove him so.
The little old Ragman - he came to a landfill. He came to the garbage pits. And then I wanted to help him in what he did, but I hung back, hiding. He climbed a hill. With tormented labor he cleared a little space on that hill. Then he sighed. He lay down. He pillowed his head on a handkerchief and a jacket. He covered his bones with an army blanket. And he died.
Oh, how I cried to witness that death! I slumped in a junked car and wailed and mourned as one who has no hope - because I had come to love the Ragman. Every other face had faded in the wonder of this man, and I cherished him; but he died. I sobbed myself to sleep.
I did not know - how could I know? - that I slept through Friday night and Saturday and its night, too.
But then, on Sunday morning, I was wakened by a violence. Light - pure, hard, demanding light - slammed against my sour face, and I blinked, and I looked, and I saw the last and the first wonder of all.
There was the Ragman, folding the blanket most carefully, a scar on his forehead, but alive! And, besides that, healthy! There was no sign of sorrow nor of age, and all the rags that he had gathered shined for cleanliness.
Well, then I lowered my head and trembling for all that I had seen, I myself walked up to the Ragman. I told him my name with shame, for I was a sorry figure next to him. Then I took off all my clothes in that place, and I said to him with dear yearning in my voice: "Dress me."
He dressed me. My Lord, he put new rags on me, and I am a wonder beside him. The Ragman, the Ragman, the Christ!

My Life Notes:
After meditating on how MY RIGHTEOUSNES was just Filthy rags, Isaiah 64:6 "all our righteous acts are like filthy rags" then I read Revelation 19:8 "Fine linen, bright and clean,was given her to wear." (Fine linen stands for the righteous acts of the saints.)"  Jesus has taken a lifetime mountian of my righteous well meaning yet in the flesh rags and woven a 'Fine linen" wedding garment from them.

A youtube argument about creation:

•  A typical discussion of Cosmology tends to look like this one:

  http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=fSqJHMdreEM
  
  OK gentlemen, you may not have been taught this in sunday school... Creation and Evolution need not be so far apart. While some fundamentalists are ridiculed for taking the Bible literally and rightly so, others understand that when reading anything, we automatically consider context, audience, and form (ie prose, poetry, narrative etc). Unfortunately while we do this for most literature automatically, we don't in considering Gen. 1. Science as we know it didn't exist back then.
  OAbrey 11 minutes ago
• @wwickeddogg To think of a piece of literature which may be as old as 4,000 years old, and impose a post Renaissance/Enlightenment view of science on it, is to do violence to the text. Even the most rigid literalist would read "The eyes of the lord go to and fro among the earth" and realize that is metaphorical. And was meant to be read as such. God doesn't have anthropomorphic features like "eyes" and they don't have legs that wander to and fro across the face of the earth.
  OAbrey 7 minutes ago
• Respond to this video... The thing that everyone should take to reading anything, is the intention one should that take what was meant to be taken literally, literally; and what was meant to be taken figuratively, figuratively. Genesis 1 displays classical, ancient poetic form.  They didn't consider rhyming back then, but looked at parallelisms instead. Like for example, the parallels between the first 3 days of creation and the last three. Write them down and see for your self. The form is poetic
  OAbrey 2 minutes ago
• Respond to this video... Finally, to what ever extent fundamentalists are criticized for being literalists, The opposing view fails by actually doing the same thing: Taking the scripture literally, when it was *meant to be taken figuratively. When Christians do so, there are no restrictions to creation in the universe.  And for agnostics, there is no threat and no reason to fight.
  Peace.

I will never forget this positive message...

Carl Ek

When I first spoke to band director Mr.Sieppe, he said "bassoon and oboe are needed." At the other end of the room I saw Owen playing the Horn. I asked you, Owen, about the Horn, and you explained all the wonderful things. So I thought, "...I think I'll play the Horn with Owen".

That's the reason I chose the Horn. I wonder what would have been had Owen been playing a bassoon... Thanks for having a Horn in your hands that day, Owen! See More

December 25, 2010 at 7:06pm · · 1 person

The death of Centrism in Western Canada? Or merely a party's expression thereof?

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.

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!





--

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

You Tube tete e tete visa vis Pakistan, Bin Laden.

• @beehive24: Pakistan is about one inch from the west giving them to China. But China doesn't need a headache.
  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.
  OAbrey 1 week ago
• Traduced1 1 week ago
• I am not American. But the world is minus one evil man. A murderer of women and children. Pakistan has a lot to answer the world since Bin Laden was in the middle of a fortress city, under the shadow of the ISS and military. For how long? The world is brewing with anger should any suspicion be found true. If I were American, I would be seeing about getting that 20 billion back.
  OAbrey 1 week ago
• @OAbrey Do you even know what your talking about. Have you ever heard of the globalists. This is all about invading countries and using what ever excuse they can come up with.
  freedom44ify 1 week ago
• @OAbrey Get off your high horse, who do you think America along with its NATO clones are? Murderers of women and chidren! MILLIONS of them. 9 Afghan kids were just recently murdered while collecting firewood by AMERICANS, who do that every day. You don't need to search for terrorists elsewhere, USA is the worst mass murederer since Hitler and the creator of terrorists. Osama is a radical preacher created by the US nothing more & the US govt knows exactly where the real 911 saudi planners are.
  Iraqgenocide2
• @Iraqgenocide2 stop using your population as a human shield to protects cowards and terrorists.
  stop blaming america for defending itself against your filth
  judderwocky
• @Iraqgenocide2 We in the west once were stupid. We thought a Muslim would never lie, being people of allah.
  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.
  
  
• @OAbrey who's we sucker?
  
  

  • @Iraqgenocide2 In war, despite every intention to the contrary some civilians die. It is a terrible thing, and a factor that not only the attacker needs to consider. The Taliban were poor at adding the cost. And if the west decides putting our troops in harms way is no longer worth it, we will pull out and you Talis can have that dust pit all to yourselves. But build more training camps, and we will bomb you out of existence.
    Still, there is no comparison to incidental deaths, and...
    
    
  • @OAbrey Since any old war is a acceptable thing, I hope America gets invaded by somebody who is preaching democracy and a bomb drops on your house. Oh and the "west" doesn't have "troops". it only has cowards and looting and child killing mercenaries. Oh yeah and I'll sit here crying crocodile tears and whining "it's a terrible thing". Americans make me puke.
    Iraqgenocide2 10 minutes ago
  • @Iraqgenocide2 Incidental deaths in war are not the same as suicide bombings in market places where children play. Certainly, from the days of the rise of the Assyrian empire in the Middle Bronze period, there is no comparison, nor with Alexader the Great, or Brittan in the colonization period. In all those situations, killing man, women and child was the way of it... just as it is the way of Bin Laden.
  • ___________________________
    
     @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?
    __________________________

  
  

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.

@anon99etc. Right is to right as Left is to left. In other words, Right wing politics only looks extreme when it is compared to the extremity of the left. As children sometimes blurt out the most embarrassing family secrets, Canadians will discover how Left the left really is.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/decision-canada/Corbella+Layton+Amateur+Hour+show+sure+entertain/4744041/story.html#ixzz1LsIOB1Hq

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.
 ______________________________

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.

Please wait while we add your comment.

Please wait while we contact Facebook.

Do you wish to connect to Twitter?
OK Cancel

Do you wish to connect to LinkedIn?
OK Cancel

Write a reply

Thank you! Your comment is awaiting approval.

We were unable to post your comment to Twitter.

We were unable to post your comment to LinkedIn.

We restrict rapid posting of multiple comments for quality reasons. You have already posted a comment within the last several seconds. Please try again later.

We are unable to add your comment at this time.

We are unable to add your comment. Are you logged in?

We will not add your comment until you remove the following words: .

We're sorry, but the comment you are replying to has been removed from the site.

Please let us know what you think.

Please shorten your comment to 3000 characters.

2306 characters left 2306 character left 2306 characters must be removed 2306 character must be removed

Share:

Post My Reply Cancel

1 replies1 reply 1 replies

Alethia

2:29 PM on April 29, 2011

This comment has been removed from our system.

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alethia. Show DetailsHide 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.

 _________________________

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

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.______________________

Alethia

1:41 PM on April 28, 2011

This comment has been removed from our system.

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alethia. Show DetailsHide 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!

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.

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.

___________________________________

Adam H. 15 comments collapsed Collapse Expand

"While Harper has done a sound job on the economy..."

Why does the Sun keep pushing that? It's not so. Harper's plans for the economy would have accelerated, lengthened and deepened the recession.

Paul Martin did a sound job on the economy. He did such a good job that Harper wasn't able to do too much damage before the recession hit. As for taking taxes off gas - well, Harper promised to eliminate the GST on gasoline when it went over 85 cents / litre. Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm still paying GST when I buy gas. 

 

Alethia 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand

Would have or did? I mean unlike the opposition parties one cannot say the Conservatives speak hypothetically. Of course you do, speak hypothetically anyhow... 

__________________________________

I think Adam may be a little young. He can't remember the massive claw backs the Liberals instigated under Martin, trying to pay for the massive debt legacy of Trudeau. 

 

____________________________________

 

Cap and Trade? Didn't that work out great for Europe? (NOT). 

_____________________________________

 

The NDP phenomena will break once Canadians start doing the math. Right now its euphoria stoked by the media... I suppose the pollsters aren't doing too bad either.

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

 

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.

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

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!

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.