# Power talks.....Rae for Liberal leader



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

The Canadian POWER elite are certainly rumbling.....

I'm ALL for it. :clap:



> *Rae speech a prelude to leadership run?*
> Mar. 10, 2006. 07:35 PM
> ALEXANDER PANETTA AND MICHELLE MACAFEE
> CANADIAN PRESS
> ...


http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...l_pageid=968332188492&call_pagepath=News/News

Yes THIS Power Corp 



> The company is controlled by Paul Desmarais, Sr.. The company has long been a close ally of the Liberal Party of Canada, although former or current members of other Canadian political parties have also worked for Power Corp. A brief summary of the connections between Power Corp. and those with political power in Canada is below.
> Former Prime Minister of Canada, Paul Martin, was hired in the 1960s to work for Paul Desmarais, Sr. by Maurice Strong. Martin became President of Canada Steamship Lines, a subsidiary of Power Corp., and in 1981 Desmarais sold the company to Martin and a partner. Martin went on to make his personal fortune as an owner of CSL.
> Former Prime Minister of Canada Jean Chrétien sat on the board of Power Corp. subsidiary Consolidated Bathurst in the late 1980s before he became the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada. Chrétien's daughter France is married to the son of Paul Desmarais, Sr., André. Also Chretien's chief of staff Eddie Goldenberg worked in the past for Power Corp.
> Former Prime Minister of Canada, the late Pierre Trudeau, served in the mid-1990s on Power Corp.'s international advisory board. Trudeau's assistant Ted Johnson also worked for Power Corp. During the Trudeau administration Michael Pitfield held a variety of positions in government but during his time in the private sector he was at one time a Vice-Chairman of Power Corp. and is currently listed as a Director Emeritus.
> ...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Corporation

Alberta offset......let the games begin.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

Tin foil hat wearers unite! I should buy shares in Alcan (more accurately, aluminium hat wearers unite!)


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

more Chretien baggage, i.e. Goldenberg and the old boys club - not a good way for the Liberal party to move along into the 21st century

on the pragmatic side; Anybody But Iggy (ABI)


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

This only leads me to believe that the majority of politicians are no more than slime balls.

The only reason a former NDP (Rae) would jump to the Liberals is to gain power. It has nothing to do with "serving the people" and everything to do with "personal gain".

If the Liberal party fall for this ruse, they are truly without ethics of any kind.

The term, "Scumbags" as well comes to mind. Canada's reputation as a great country becomes more at risk with each passing defection. tptptptp


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

Parties do not define their people. Parties are not unchanging, and people are not unchanging. This does not seem to be a 'death bed' conversion.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Bob Rae pissed of big business when he was premier and as the old saying goes; "a leopoard doesn't change his spots" and I hardly think Bob Rae could

Rae's an intellectual, but was ineffective as a political leader which was evidence by his party's sound trouncing by David "I gotta read from a teleprompter" Peterson

Regardless of your politcial stripes (or spots) big business's political leverage is a reality - ignoring this is not serving the people 
it's arrogant


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

Back in the late 70's or early 80's in (Northern Nova Scotia) I had an occasion to hear Bob Rea speak. It was either just before or just after he was elected Leader of the Ontario New Democratic Party. 

At that time my wife thought he was a wonderful New Democrat, on the other hand I thought he sounded like a confused Liberal. 

Perhaps he is less or no longer confused.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

BigDL said:


> Perhaps he is less or no longer confused.


We used to call this "selling out"...... :yawn:


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

rgray said:


> We used to call this "selling out"...... :yawn:


It's now called "emersoning"


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I once was chosen as part of a "student focus group" circa 1984 to let Bob Rae's Ontario NDPs know what was on students' minds. Sitting in Rae's office (but not with Rae present) I mentioned that one of the barriers to entry in my field was a union that jealously guarded new openings. Suddenly the whole group of students chimed in with complaints of unions who had given them grief, promised them membership and reneged, skimmed their wages... Rae's assistant didn't know how to deal with it. Kept trying to tell everyone that they meant something else and that their anger was misdirected. I'm sure none of the information gathered there was formulated into policy.

Rae would make a good federal politician though. He had plenty of practice taking provincial helicopters to fly him to his cottage so he could enjoy lavish lobster dinners paid for by the Province. 

And of course, Rae is a real mensch. His kids all went to Ontario's public schools...oh wait, they didn't.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Rae's an intellectual, but was ineffective as a political leader which was evidence by his party's sound trouncing by David "I gotta read from a teleprompter" Peterson


You mean the guy BOB RAE DEFEATED......oh that guy. Got your history a little twisted.

Rae has quite clearly stated he mishandled the business community and under estimated the recession as did the rest of the country as well. 
The backing of Power Corp is a ticket to the biz community and deep pockets.
You make an assessment of someone over actions a decade ago and don't allow for change - big error..... 
Incipient aging. 

Rae has a lot of respect from academia to gov circles to business circles and he could weld the left together and bring the Libs a bit centre left as they normally are and in my mind need to be for a bit.
There is a social program challenge arising and it needs a united front to confront the challenge.

What other candidate who is willing has his weight? - ZERO.
Between Hargrove and Rae the Libs have a chance to regain ground lost to the NDP under Martin's Blue Liberal regime.

Demarais is no fool...watch and see.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

MacDoc said:


> You mean the guy BOB RAE DEFEATED......oh that guy. Got your history a little twisted.
> 
> Demarais is no fool...watch and see.


you are correct.
i did make a mistake

bob rae was trounced by a former golf pro

demarais just wants to get value for his dollar when it comes to renting politicians
i don't like the old boys club, heavy with the stench of chretien and his cronies, getting back into the game

isn't it time that chretien and godenberg are put out to pasture?
did their money dry up already?
bad investments? 
no enough hotels?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Shall we compare golf pro legacy goodwill to Rae's. Tar and feather for the former in Ontario.

Rae was hardly the cause of the very deep recession tho as he freely admits he could have handled it better. In my mind that experience and those past make him a better candidate and his Education study was very favourably received in Ontario.

Haven't heard much mea culpa from the golfer.
I like Bob Rae's easy humour, intellect and willingness to admit to stumbles.
Hard mix to find in a politico.

There will always be eminences gré in major political parties - that Demarais has a wide spectrum in his "stable" speaks well to his savvy. Canada has been served reasonably well.......it's especially critical right now with the "clearly wet behind the ears" crowd running the Con show.
How far would that bunch have got without the "old guard" like Hugh Segal.

I think Rae may be the right guy for the time and circumstance...


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

I think Rae would make a fine leader. He is intelligent, sincere, and tempers his ideals with pragmatism.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Yes "pragmatic" is a well suited description - principled but not an ideologue.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

MacDoc said:


> Yes "pragmatic" is a well suited description - principled but not an ideologue.



pragmatic ?
when he refused to meet with a major pharmaceutical corp. that wanted to build a plant in Ontario
and
helicopters trips for his weekend pleasure getaways?

about as "pragmatic" as Leona Helmsley

I'd like to see evidence that this leopard changed his spots, but won't hold my breath


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

While I never did care for his party at the time, I always viewed Rae himself as a bright, well spoken and savvy kind of guy.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> ...helicopters trips for his weekend pleasure getaways?


I'm sure one can always find some criticism that renders anyone unfit for office (in some tiny, closed minds, anyway). For the record, this is what Rae had to say in question period about helicopters:


> *Mr Steven W. Mahoney (Mississauga West): *My question is to the Premier. Premier, we have some folks who were quite shocked, on the morning of May 17, to tell us they saw an OPP helicopter landing in the town park in Portland in eastern Ontario, at which time they saw you disembark from that OPP helicopter and promptly jump into a boat for a short ride out to your family island in Big Rideau Lake. Then, in the afternoon on May 18, apparently you were brought back ashore, at which time the same OPP helicopter picked you up and whisked you away to places unknown...
> 
> *Hon Bob Rae (Premier and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs):* ...When I took office I was told by the Secretary of Cabinet and by the head of the OPP, as well as by my security staff, that there would be times and occasions when taking the OPP helicopter would be the only way I could get any time available or be able to be with my family on short notice.
> 
> ...


Let's tar and feather, him! Let's boil him in oil?

MacSpectrum's next target? Tommy Douglas? How about that Cindy Klassen? Go get 'em!


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> pragmatic ?
> when he refused to meet with a major pharmaceutical corp. that wanted to build a plant in Ontario
> and
> helicopters trips for his weekend pleasure getaways?


a) nxw answered the "pleasure trip" - nice try - I have NO DOUBT in my mind that Bob Rae is very conscious of reasonable use of public funds and that would be the *very least* any concerns I might have about him.

b) he quite freely admitted he did not handle the business community as well as he could have - as I've said for the umpteenth time or have you not bothered to read WHAT HE SAID.

now get over it unless you have some substance to account for your "indigestion problem". 
I think the term is dyspepsia....comes with aging....premature or not 

I'm quite willing to admit my displeasure and raised eyebrows about McGuinty but his approach and actions have EARNED my respect.
Seems you are too set in your ways to accord Bob Rae the same latitude.

He's a very fine, caring and talented public figure and if we had Ottawa populated with more like he and Ed Broadbent and David Lewis and Tommy Douglas we'd be far better off as a nation.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

I have concerns regarding Rae, but a genuine leadership contest will air out what he is willing to say in public on record as a potential politician (a little more difficult than speaking as an ex-politico). 

I think the opportunity is excellent but I expect him to be more forthright than a 'shoe in' type candidate simply because he must clear up his party baggage. He can come out with some interesting ideas, but he must clearly oppose certain things otherwise he will be 'Red Harper' for many; or just 'NDP Rae'. Either way, his ideas need clarifying under the vicious light of politics and political consequences. 

In the end, the most important political thing for the country is not a batch of supposedly thoughtful lefties anymore than it is a batch of supposedly thoughtful righties or whatever other mix, it is a true leadership contest for the Liberals (in the short-term). 

The country will benefit from having more than one powerful national party (without a leader by coronation) at the same time. It has been some time but, due to good foundations and some luck, Canada has been taking advantage of auto-pilot. We still have some time, in my opinion, but that doesn't mean we have to use it. Time to turn off the auto-pilot and expect two strong, viable and idea-based parties to exist simultaneously.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I think we are a generation away from that - one horse too new - one too old.

Both major parties need fresh blood of a different sort than previous and I see no Leaders with a Capital L anywhere in the mix.

I'd like to see a WORKING minority for a few years to let the newcomers settle in. A BIT of autopilot is warranted - I'd be very leery of significant tinkering by the likes of the current Cons and the current rudderless Libs need a refresher.

I'd like to see the minority deal with fiscal imbalance/transfer and some parliamentary cleanup tho I think Harper has lost the "authority/trust" for that.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

nxnw said:


> I think Rae would make a fine leader. He is intelligent, sincere, and tempers his ideals with pragmatism.


Blah, blah, blah! And he's another changeling... Doesn't integrity count for *anything* anymore?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

nxnw said:


> I'm sure one can always find some criticism that renders anyone unfit for office (in some tiny, closed minds, anyway). For the record, this is what Rae had to say in question period about helicopters:Let's tar and feather, him! Let's boil him in oil?
> 
> MacSpectrum's next target? Tommy Douglas? How about that Cindy Klassen? Go get 'em!



"tiny, closed minds" - oye

I have yet to see evidence that Rae has changed his arrogant anti-business ways, Dumarais and Peterson hob(k)nobbing excluded.

But if pushed between supporting Rae or Iggy, well, talk about lesser of two evils

Perhaps Rae should be a Liberal MP for a while so that he can show he has learned from his mistakes as macdoc suggests
he's been out of politics for quite a while
look at the disaster the Liberals went thru after Turner was elected leader
some times, old dogs just don't hunt

Bob Rae has a poor legacy in Ontario and the voters gave him the royal heave ho
As they say; "What have you done for me lately?"
And if McGuinty, a relative unknown, impressed macdoc, why not give Belinda Stronach a shot?
female, single mother, business person, not a lawyer, no ties to the Chretien (little boy from Shawinigan) cabal
a fresh start wouldn't be a horrible way to go
re-treads are just that

fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me
unless of course you're George w. Bush

of course nxnw supports Iggy, a "Canadian" who supports the Iraq war, torture "lite" and hasn't lived in Canada for over 20 decades, but what's that got to do with a Liberal leader, eh?

the Liberals need to make a bold move in a new direction and Belinda brings fresh blood - the Liberals really should give a woman a chance
about time for the old boys club members to retire to their winter homes in Bermuda


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Sinc before you dismiss Bob Rae as another "slime ball" in it for the gain perhaps you should KNOW a bit about the man.

He's a Rhodes Scholar and moves in the very highest cirlces of power in academia and business in Canada.











> Robert Keith (Bob) Rae, PC , OC, O.Ont , QC , LL.B , LL.D (born August 2, 1948, in Ottawa, Ontario) was the 21st premier of Ontario, and the first leader of the Ontario New Democratic Party (NDP) to serve in that capacity.





> Family
> 
> Rae's father, Saul, was a career diplomat who was born to a Jewish father and a Scottish Protestant mother and raised as a Christian. Rae's mother was an Anglican and their children, including Bob, were raised in the Anglican Church of Canada. Rae's wife, Arlene Perly Rae, is Jewish, as are their children. Though Rae remains an Anglican, he has a strong interest in Jewish issues, and some consider him to be Ontario's first Jewish premier.
> Rae's brother John is a Vice-President of Power Corporation, and is a prominent member of the Liberal Party. He was also an adviser to Jean Chrétien from the 1970s until Chrétien retired in 2003. Rae's younger brother David was diagnosed with lymphatic cancer in 1987. Despite a bone marrow transplant from his brother, David died in 1989 at age 32.





> Since 1996
> 
> Rae resigned from the New Democratic Party in the late 1990s, due to his appointment to Security Intelligence Review Committee. There was some speculation that Prime Minister Jean Chrétien would appoint him Governor-General of Canada in 1999, but he was passed over in favour of Adrienne Clarkson. There was further speculation that Rae would run for the federal Liberal Party in the 2000 election, though nothing came of this at the time.
> Rae was made an Officer of the Order of Canada in 2000, and in 2004 he was awarded the Order of Ontario. He was appointed the sixth chancellor of Wilfrid Laurier University on July 2, 2003, and was installed at that school's fall convocation in October. Rae is currently a partner of Goodmans LLP, a Toronto-based corporate law firm, an adjunct professor at the University of Toronto, and a Senior Fellow of Massey College. He has written two books: From Protest to Power: personal reflections on a life in politics (1996) and Three Questions: Prosperity and the Public Good (1998).
> Rae returned to active political controversy on April 16, 2002, two days after Mike Harris resigned as premier, with an opinion piece in the National Post newspaper. In an article entitled, Parting Company with the NDP, Rae strongly criticized what he perceived as a bias against Israel in the federal party. He also criticized the NDP for rejecting Tony Blair's Third Way and for refusing to accept globalization and open markets, suggesting that the party's economic policies were insufficient for the 21st century and that the party as a whole was no longer "worthy of support".


There's lots more of interest in the Wiki coverage and his break with the NDP was clearly due to the NDPs ability to move forward in the way the Labour Party has done in Britain to the global reality and fiscal responsibility. 
He's matured while much of the NDP is mired in the past just as Tony Blair has to deal with in his party in Britain.

Rae showed signs of this in his Premiership of Ontario and he and the Ontario NDP do not see eye to eye to this day.
He's clearly shifted his thinking to the more centrist Liberal camp and this was not a casual one time jump.



> In July 2005, The Globe and Mail and the National Post both reported that Rae was again being considered for appointment to the position of Governor General. The appointment went instead to Michaëlle Jean.


This is the kind of quality, accomplished, thoughtful and experienced leader we need in Canada - 

Lightly dismissing Bob Rae as an opportunist says far more about your lack of informed perception than about Rae's suitability to lead the Liberals..


----------



## JPL (Jan 21, 2005)

rgray said:


> Blah, blah, blah! And he's another changeling... Doesn't integrity count for *anything* anymore?


LOL you been under a rock somewhere? Integrity? Politicians don't think that word applies to them and prove it everyday.

Unless and until private contribution party funding, lobbying, behind the scenes patronage horse trading are abolished we will continue to get the kinds of politicians we have and deserve. We have to make a politicians first job as that of serving the people and not as that of being re-elected.

I do think it's a thankless, high pressure job and I wouldn't want it, but for those who enjoy the glass house, we should be able to define some formula for publicly funding the parties, and give the elected a clean board on which to write, with no strings attached. Maybe then we will get politicians who will spend their mental acuity on behalf of the people they claim they want to represent.

Personally I was not amused with B. Rae as the premier, but I do respect him as a man of principles and I think he would be a very good leader for the Liberals and yes a tad left is probably where they should be.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

It's rather sad to see people reduced to waiting for deliverance from a politician. 

Let's just clone good 'ol Tommy Douglas--apparently he has lots of fresh ideas to save the country.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

...and your oh so astute alternative is???


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> ...of course nxnw supports Iggy, a "Canadian" who supports the Iraq war, torture "lite" and hasn't lived in Canada for over 20 decades, but what's that got to do with a Liberal leader, eh?


Just because I respond to your dishonest, simplistic and xenophobic attacks on Ignatieff (exemplified by the above quote) doesn't mean I support him. It means that I disagree with your dishonest, simplistic and xenophobic criticisms.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

>>>...and your oh so astute alternative is???

My oh so astute observation is that a country will find itself in difficulty if its citizenry counts on politicans to save it. Unless the desire to "do things better" comes from the people themselves, switching captains on the ship of state is going to do little more than change the guest list at the captain's table.

Sure, give Tommy Douglas another run at it.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I wonder if Bob Rae became the leader of the Liberals if a real coalition might be formed with the NDP? I can't see the two parties merging, but maybe this is what it will take to bring about a majority government for someone here in Canada. Let the moderate to left form one party, and the right form another party, and let the "best party win", so to speak. Proportional representation might lead to fractured segments that need a coalition, but this might lead to two ideological parties with viewpoints that were distinct.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

nxnw said:


> Just because I respond to your dishonest, simplistic and xenophobic attacks on Ignatieff (exemplified by the above quote) doesn't mean I support him. It means that I disagree with your dishonest, simplistic and xenophobic criticisms.


you mean iggy doesn't support the war in iraq or "torture lite" and has indeed lived in canada for the last 20 years?

i submit it is you who are simplisitic regardless of the la(w)yers of your diatribe

i guess you'd prefer that this "little russian" would just know his place


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

Why don't you two give it a rest for a while.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> you mean iggy doesn't support the war in iraq or "torture lite" and has indeed lived in canada for the last 20 years?


I mean that you distort and misrepresent Ignatieff's opinions and persist in doing so. What he has actually said, and what his opinions actually are has been discussed in considerable detail already.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

nxnw said:


> I mean that you distort and misrepresent Ignatieff's opinions and persist in doing so. What he has actually said, and what his opinions actually are has been discussed in considerable detail already.


just because you, or Iggy for that matter, say "it ain't so" doesn't mean Iggy didn't say it

spin doctoring is the new bloodsport of the 21st century
thousands of dead Iraqis can't be wrong


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Geez will you guys start your a thread about it 

••



> My oh so astute observation is that a country will find itself in difficulty if its citizenry counts on politicans to save it. Unless the desire to "do things better" comes from the people themselves, switching captains on the ship of state is going to do little more than change the guest list at the captain's table.


A nostrum......no actual prescription.
Poll after poll has shown Canadians unhappy and very angry with the nature of the political system itself in Canada.....so obviously the "desire" IS there. The respect for politicians and the political system is at an all time low.

How do YOU translate that desire - that clearly exists - into actual change?
Method?
What the results would look like??

I'm all ears.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

almost all politicians are opportunists and don't really care for the public good when compared to their own

so it starts from a grass roots level

1. have each riding association make prospective candidates sign a contract indicating they will NOT change parties unless they give up their seat and seek re-election in a by-election - the could be allowed to sit as an independant if they strongly disagree with the party on a certain issue
of course "free votes" as per #2 could allow a member to sit with the party, yet vote against it

2. each MP must start to represent their own riding and start voting in the best interest of their riding rather than what the PMO or party whip tells them

there is too much power in the PMO and the cabal of appartchiks that service said office

bring back the power to the people in the form of an MP that truly represents them

perhaps then politicians might be more respected than used car salesmen


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> I wonder if Bob Rae became the leader of the Liberals if a real coalition might be formed with the NDP? I can't see the two parties merging, but maybe this is what it will take to bring about a majority government for someone here in Canada. Let the moderate to left form one party, and the right form another party, and let the "best party win", so to speak. Proportional representation might lead to fractured segments that need a coalition, but this might lead to two ideological parties with viewpoints that were distinct


As Hebert in the Star noted last year in the campaign, Martin's political positioning was an anomaly - his approach and policies normally closely akin to that of the Progressive Conservatives. He would be THEIR candidate of choice in another age.

I think this was a product of 
The times ( need to get the economic house in order an the policies that dictated ).
The man himself ( clearly cautious with the purse strings )
The fractured opposition on the right.

I'd say a closer melding of NDP and Liberal will be necessary IF the Liberals are to regain prominence in any short term. Blair's is a strong vision and that the NDP seem to miss this gives the Liberals an opportunity to regroup.
Jack Layton in my mind made a fatal error in bringing down Martin as he did.
Up to the Liberals to get the right guy to take advantage of that and I think Bob Rae is the clear "early pick" to do so.
Tipping point for the Liberal fortunes in the next short while.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MacDoc, how about the Progressive Liberal Party? The NDP came from the CCF, and the Liberals might now move forward to capture both the center and the left. This is what might happen in the US if the Republicans select a very conservative candidate for president in 2008. We shall see.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Dr.G. said:


> MacDoc, how about the Progressive Liberal Party? The NDP came from the CCF, and the Liberals might now move forward to capture both the center and the left. This is what might happen in the US if the Republicans select a very conservative candidate for president in 2008. We shall see.


a very conservative Republican candidate to capture both center (note spelling) and the left?
that, I would pay good money to see
Hell, I'd pay for David Frum's share for him to see that too


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> A nostrum......no actual prescription.
> Poll after poll has shown Canadians unhappy and very angry with the nature of the political system itself in Canada.....so obviously the "desire" IS there. The respect for politicians and the political system is at an all time low.
> 
> How do YOU translate that desire - that clearly exists - into actual change?
> ...


Well, it would start with voting for the party that already holds that position, and that has consistently promised to bring reform to our political system. Granted, they might always turn out to be liars once they have the power, but I'll believe that people actually want change when they are willing to vote for it. The majority of voters in my experience don't want to actually think before voting, they just want to vote the same way they always have. We will not have any real change so long as we continue to maintain the myth that there are only two real parties.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> MacDoc, how about the Progressive Liberal Party? The NDP came from the CCF, and the Liberals might now move forward to capture both the center and the left. This is what might happen in the US if the Republicans select a very conservative candidate for president in 2008. We shall see.


Reflect on the message of The Greatest Canadian in his speech Mouseland an allegory of the Canadian Political scene beginning in the Forties and it continues today.

Where the population believes that if you can just change the colour of the cats you can acquire a better government. 

In fact The Greatest Canadian addresses this in his Mouseland speech. He talks about the government of cats in this kind of situation "the problem is they sound like mice but eat like cats." 

Perhaps the credibility gap we have with politicians arises from the profession of the majority of the elected representatives leave to run for office.

When folks collectively come to the conclusion, we don't need to send anymore lawyers to run our Parliaments) or Legislature(s), we might have a chance for "Peace, Order and GOOD Government"

On another front I have hopes that minority governments shall continue into the future. Hopefully with the elimination of our present first past the post system replaced with proportional representation much like that of New Zealand's electoral system we will not have to rely on the electoral power of the Bloc. 

I further hope like others that we shall empower our representative(s) and diminish the power of the PMO and the back room boys. :clap:


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

BigDL said:


> I further hope like others that we shall empower our representative(s) and diminish the power of the PMO and the back room boys. :clap:


That's one motion I can second! :clap: :clap:


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> I further hope like others that we shall empower our representative(s) and diminish the power of the PMO and the back room boys.


now, you're talking my language !

Vive la Canada libre !


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Darn, there he goes agreeing with me again!


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

SINC said:


> Darn, there he goes agreeing with me again!


please, please don't force me to go live in Texas, I mean Alberta...
I like my health care


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> MacDoc, how about the *Progressive Liberal* Party


Dr. G I'm shocked... a tautology from thou 

•••

RevM

MacFury employed a very poor metaphor for the political system as the only real alternative for change in his scenario is mutiny.

Part of the problem I perceive is the ponderous nature of government these days. Real change seems to demand a crisis to trigger it.

At the same time real change is disruptive and "things ain't too bad' for most Canadians so disruption is looked at warily.

I actually think Rae may have the right mix of gradualism and activism to at least start the process within the Liberals who are in dire need.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> Real change seems to demand a crisis to trigger it.


that sounds eerily familiar to the PNAC playbook



> “The process of transformation,” the plan said, “is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.”
> 
> American Free Press asked Christopher Maletz, assistant director of the PNAC about what was meant by the need for “a new Pearl Harbor.”
> 
> “They needed more money to up the defense budget for raises, new arms, and future capabilities,” Maletz said. “Without some disaster or catastrophic event” neither the politicians nor the military would have approved, Maletz said.


http://www.americanfreepress.net/12_24_02/America_Pearl_Harbored/america_pearl_harbored.html


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MacDoc's choices: "follow the leader" or "mutiny." 

You may not like my metaphors, but your range of political alternatives leaves a lot to be desired. If it pleases you to believe that trading one left-of-centre politician for another will cause a fresh political breeze to blow from Sea to Shining Sea I encourage you to devote all your available attention to such potential political revolutions.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Oh...and my prescription. No single body can control this much money without corrupting itself. All levels of government have grown far too powerful for their own good and their only fuel is the power that comes from spending--mostly wasting--Canadian salaries. There is no incentive to save money or cut spending.

I would propose that the first step toward reform would be for government ministries to form corporations within government. These corporations would compete with each other to deliver services to Canadians. These corporations would be encouraged to partner with private sector corporations, where feasible, to deliver these services. Those corporations who consistently fail to win internal bids for services would have to adjust their salaries according to their level of success.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Macfury said:


> Those corporations who consistently fail to win internal bids for services would have to adjust their salaries according to their level of success.


Ah, yes, like the gun registry, a mini corp set up by the feds to bleed us dry.

What planet have you been stealing your ideas from?


----------



## daBoss (Jun 20, 2003)

Your buddy Ralph, our local drunk who made it big, was a Liberal before political expediency made him into a Tory. I guess that makes him a scumbag too.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

daBoss said:


> Your buddy Ralph, our local drunk who made it big, was a Liberal before political expediency made him into a Tory. I guess that makes him a scumbag too.


zing !


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

>>Ah, yes, like the gun registry, a mini corp set up by the feds to bleed us dry.

Nope, no new corps. They have to form them out of what's already there. They would have to provide "services" (and I use the term loosely) to justify their existence. There is currently no motivation to either cut spending or deliver more service for less. Fear of losing one's position tends to have some effect.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I think it's nice when a politician can prove that he or she has always believed X, Y and Z. I'm more than grateful, however, if a politician begins to act in a way which pleases me, regardless of whatever half-baked socialistic excuse for a political cause they've crawled up from. I may not trust them, but will appreciate their deeds. If within Bob Rae lies a sleeping libertarian (no MacDoc, I didn't say Liberal) I'd encourage him to go for it.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> I would propose that the first step toward reform would be for government ministries to form corporations within government. *These corporations would compete with each other to deliver services to Canadians.*


ah yes the "red in tooth and claw" mind set emerges - why am I not surprised.
So we then have to or three or more of everything??? Sounds wonderfully efficient.

So far your approach is redolent of anarchy which it appeared to be in the first place. Captains aren't elected they are the sole authority and sailors don't vote - they do what they are told.
It has nothing to do with my LIKING your analogy- it's a fallacious analogy to the political system.

BTW who is the almighty THEY ?....who are to undertake your transformation of "so far undefined" government services to the masses

and how specifically did THEY acquire this immense transformational power??

•••••



> Fear of losing one's position tends to have some effect.


oh you mean like getting voted out of office.....'pears not.
Of course we have those wonders of efficiency integrity and delivery of goods and services such as Enron and Nortel to model after. 

Bottom line - without offsetting oversight with some teeth ( such as the Auditor General showed with Adscam ) then ANY large organization is prone to corruption and inefficiency private or government, profit or non profit.

The quality of the leadership and the quality of the system of checks and balances within which the organization functions are the only safeguards against abuse.
The Liberals in particular and too much of the Federal government suffers from a lack of both.
Martin instituted some much needed oversight, Harper we hope if he gets his feet out of the same mudhole can do more on that end.

Bob Rae can provide some intelligent experienced and thoughtful leadership for the Liberals in opposition which itself is a critical oversight function - the heart of the parliamentary system ...an effective Opposition and an Independent judiciary.

Governments are not businesses but efficiency standards can certainly be applied to their delivery of value for the tax payers dollar. Who judges how well that value is being achieved is where the difficulty lies.
One of the few is international corruption rankings and Canada there does reasonably well against it's peers.

Long before that tho are the fundamental issues of what services are needed or wanted and what should be left to individuals and private concerns.

I can't think of any party in power anywhere despite promises to the contrary that actually "shrank" government.
Clinton may have come close as he kept the growth below that of the economy and showed a surplus tho that surplus was built on a bubble.

Even that supposed bastion of "conservative" thinking.....



> Think of Premier Ralph Klein as a carpenter – a cabinet-maker to be more precise. Imagine him sitting down to refurbish an old piece of furniture that he created just a few years ago when he became a master builder. The old cabinet may have lost part of its sheen, but it has served him well. Still, thinks the Premier draftsman, a little veneer and a few more drawers wouldn’t hurt – would it?
> 
> And so, last week Mr. Klein did just that – he added to the size of his cabinet and gave it a whole new look.
> 
> ...


http://www.taxpayer.com/main/news.php?news_id=1181

So I ask again.....*.WHO is the omnipotent THEY to undertake your reformation project to competing federal corporations???*

*HOW did they acquire the power???*


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Captains aren't elected they are the sole authority and sailors don't vote - they do what they are told.
> It has nothing to do with my LIKING your analogy- it's a fallacious analogy to the political system.
> ...
> Governments are not businesses but efficiency standards can certainly be applied to their delivery of value for the tax payers dollar. Who judges how well that value is being achieved is where the difficulty lies.
> ...


Didn't Plato use the ship analogy to describe democracy (portray it as inferior)?
Either way, remember that analogies are not perfect or meant to be; you seem to like calling them fallacious for some reason, which is an odd label...fallacious even. 
...
Governments aren't very efficient or innovative by their very nature (no profit motive). They can have occasional bursts of it though. Oversight and other things can reduce corruption, but their nature will remain. That's why what they do must be carefully chosen and, when possible, using armslength entities with straight-forward policies and performance measures (news-cycle political interference makes things much worse); although you still get budget problems. 

It's a difficult challenge, but improving things also involves no sacred cows. I don't see the competitive services thing working, although outsourcing and Crown Corps. for some things may improve the efficiency and/or results. 
...
The surplus was, from what I read, quite sustainable even following a recession. Some CBO projections were overly optimistic but, even after later adjustments, the surplus projections remained. So, "aided by a bubble, but built on stronger fundamentals" may be more the case, such that there may have been a temporary deficit during the recession. I'd have to check on that one.
...
Please stop shouting. You want an immediately applicable 'solution' and maybe others want to talk about greater and more idealistic possiblities for change. I don't see why that involves shouting.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> I can't think of any party in power anywhere despite promises to the contrary that actually "shrank" government.


Klein actually did. Not trying to open up the usual 'blame Klein' stuff, just pointing it out.

[Edit: I think Martin did too (shortlived). Even after cuts in transfers to provinces, there were other significant reductions.]


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MacDoc: I think your fears of anarchy seem to be an inherent part of your makeup and I don't want to upset you. Your vision of anarchy is my vision of freedom. People who want to be protected and regulated by large paternalistic organizations can always find one. That they exist throughout the world is not an argument that will lead me to easily accepting them and I'll do my best to dismantle the ones that bother me the most.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I'm not in the least "afraid" of anarchy - I'm as anti-authoritarian as they come.
I'm also pragmatic enough to know that some form of large scale government appears inevitable.

What I'm bringing out in you is simply something that you fear to state outwardly that you'd prefer to do away with major government entirely. Nothing wrong with that approach tho impractical as it has always turned out.
You have a vision of how society should be governed but you can't or won't describe a method to get there and the nature of that governance.

The still mysterious THEY will somehow bring this "land of the truly free" about.
I have yet to hear who THEY are and HOW you would bring this form of governance into being.

••

Metaphor and analogy are used with where attributes are SIMILAR.
An unelected Captain with sole authority over a crew is NOT SIMILAR to an elected head of state governing a populace.

It IS similar to Napoleon's or Louis XiV's or even Saddam's version of the state and may even be a reasonable analogy for Chretien presiding over the rest of the Liberal party..at least Chretien wished and acted as if it was.

It's a false analogy to a democratic state in the main because a captain of the ship is not "voted' out of office
The Captain is in no way representative of the crew, neither chosen by them nor responsible to them for his actions.... but rather is chosen by and responsible to the owners of the ship.
Easy concept to see the disparity......for most.

•••



> Oh...and my prescription. _No single body can control this much money without corrupting itself._


Agreed but it's not a prescription it's a diagnosis of the "disease".

Prescription - Take two independent Auditor Generals and examine the patient closely at frequent intervals for signs of it spreading. 
Treat with a broad spectrum dose of 'dismissal for cause".

aka oversight with teeth.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MacDoc--of course I want to do away with big government. Attrition baby. Cut that fat puppy down to size.


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

Dr.G. said:


> ...but maybe this is what it will take to bring about a majority government for someone here in Canada. Let the moderate to left form one party, and the right form another party, and let the "best party win", so to speak.


The "unite the right" movement didn't result in a majority, I doubt a "unite the left" movement would either.

Not all NDP or Liberal voters will support a combined party or coalition, and the Bloc still holds a whack of seats in QC, so it will be hard for *anyone* to win a majority anytime soon.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

PenB - yep - majority a tough challenge but a left minority is a better social fit for Canada for getting things done.
Right minority a better Provincial right fit for Quebec.
Interesting times 

•••



> MacDoc--of course I want to do away with big government. Attrition baby. Cut that fat puppy down to size.


Still no HOW and still no WHO.

Since not even those supposedly dedicated to that cause haven't managed it yet that seems a rather unreal wish list.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> The Captain is in no way representative of the crew, neither chosen by them nor responsible to them for his actions.... but rather is chosen by and responsible to the owners of the ship.
> Easy concept to see the disparity......for most.


If I recall correctly, the Plato analogy described the absurdity of it if the passengers (crew?) would democratically steer instead of by Captain's decision. That analogy was quite good, although it was tilted against democratic government. Easy to see where he was coming from (although I may have just made that up...but I heard that analogy somewhere  ).


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Umm he was arguing against elected leaders. Basically an elected ship's captain is a ludicrous idea......I concur.

The analogy to the CURRENT political democratic system in Canada remains fallacious.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

Beej said:


> If I recall correctly, the Plato analogy described the absurdity of it if the passengers (crew?) would democratically steer instead of by Captain's decision.


 We don't steer the ship of state, however. We elect a captain that we believe will do it well.

This emphasizes the confusion some have about leadership in a democracy. The public *will* is established at election time. A leader has the right and the duty to steer the ship in accordance with the principles he stands for, and for which he was elected. 

The captain does not abandon his course at the public whim, however.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Horrid analogy - please don't continue the farce. Ship Captains are NOT elected, sailors don't vote......talk about obfuscation.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

MacDoc said:


> Horrid analogy - please don't continue the farce...


Somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bread!


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

nxnw said:


> Somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bread!


:lmao:


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Horrid analogy - please don't continue the farce. Ship Captains are NOT elected, sailors don't vote......talk about obfuscation.


Odd response. The analogy describes, in terms of a ship, what democracy is like. IF on a ship, the passengers chose a captain and then left it alone then you've got an analogy in ship terms. You could also do an elitist analogy: The passengers with the three largest rooms get to choose what to do. There are many options; try to understand that the analogy doesn't have to be restricted to how ships are captained now, but can be used to put the concept in the framework of the ship and explore different ways of running it.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)




----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

A zombie made me do it.beejacon

Just heard on the news that the Fiberals will be stuck with Bob Rae for a couple more years.

Supposedly they would hold a convention within five months to replace a decapitated leader but instead will wait until the Spring of 2013 to do so.

Sounds like they are waiting for Justin to arise from the ashes and lead them to the promised land.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I suspect that this is their way of protecting themselves. Better let this clown act as interim leader and wear himself out over the next few years, so they're not stuck with him at crunch time--in a real election.


----------

