# The Next Federal Election



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Okay....

Ive seen the direction of the polls and I've talked to countless people all across Canada.

So I am now prepared to make a very early election call. A prediction for all to see and to comment upon, at a later date. 









Paul Martin will be the official leader of the Opposition, after the next election.

If he's lucky.

Jack Layton may actually end up with that post for the next four years.

Say hello to Prime Minister Stephen Harper.   

And say hello to a REAL Canadian democracy....for the very FIRST time in our history!

I can hardly wait!


----------



## godot (Jan 17, 2004)

Interesting. 

Some thoughts and a prediction:

•Paul Martin seems to be ahead of his party in popularity. 

•The Conservatives won't have their act together when an election is called. Even their leadership contest is in an organizational shambles.

•The NDP seems to be getting its national act together but grass roots organization is pretty weak.

•The Bloc refuses to die although it doesn't seem to inspire anyone.

•Martin will call a spring election before the Conservatives get any constituency organization in place.

•Once Harper is declared the leader many former PC workers will just drop out, particularly east of Manitoba.

•Harper's fluent French will not be enough for him to win more than a seat or two in Quebec, if that.

•Atlantic provinces still see Harper as a western based Reform politician and will go mostly Liberal with some increase in NDP support.

•Today's prediction: Martin majority government. NDP and Conservatives almost tied for second spot with NDP becoming official opposition. Bloc will still be there with slightly reduced numbers.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Liberal majority (a bit reduced), Conservatives as official opposition (no seats in Quebec indeed, few east of Saskatoon), PQ picks up a few seats, NDP stands still (Copps runs for NDP and loses).

Stronach disappears to finishing school in Swiss Alps. Harper goes on quest for charisma but falls off sea-doo. Ralph retires from politics after significant coronary event.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

Macnutt: While your enthusiasm for a Conservative government is hardly surprising, I have my doubts that they have the numbers to pull it off. Winning seats west of Ontario is going to prove to be very, very difficult especially in NB and NS where folks still see this party as little more than Reform/Alliance. 

Nothing's impossible in Canadian politics, but I'm sceptical that they can pull it off given the regional break-down of the polling numbers.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> Paul Martin will be the official leader of the Opposition, after the next election.
> If he's lucky.


I still have $100 that says you're wrong, if you're willing.  



> Winning seats [for the Cs] west of Ontario is going to prove to be very, very difficult


I think you meant "east"


----------



## Brainstrained (Jan 15, 2002)

Saturday's G&M did an "analysis" similar to Macnutt's, but based on actually polling results, in Saturday's edition. 

Their conclusion was a Liberal minority, which I agree with.

I doubt the Conservatives can hold their numbers once Steven Harper is actually elected and they, once again, look and sound like the Reform party, which the Grits will do their best to reinforce. 

Harper's previous comments about firewalling Alberta and a welfare mentality in Atlantic Canada, are not forgotten and do not play well in Ontario and points east. 

Given that Martin's approval rating of 57 per cent is probably higher east of Manitoba, Stephen Harper will become prime minister only in the right's wettest and wildest dreams.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

You have all presented very logical arguments...and I would tend to agree with your assesments...

Except for one thing.

The Canadian voters are seriously PI**ED OFF!! Big Time! And rightfully so!  

This election won't be about logic, or who would be the best leaders for the next half-decade.

It will be about flushing the crooks out and punishing them for stealing so much of our hard-earned tax dollars. It will be something akin to the election right after Mulroney stepped down. But worse.

In Quebec, the Bloc will sweep most of the ridings. Paul Martin himself may lose his seat.

In everything west of the Manitoba/Ontario border it will be a massive defeat for the Federal Liberals. 

In Atlantic Canada they may be able to hold onto a few seats. But it will not be a pretty picture for the Federal Liberals out there, either.

Southern Ontario will be the big surprise. The Federal Liberals will lose a large number of seats in this traditional Liberal stronghold (many of them will be lost in very close races) and the Liberals will be lucky if they can form the official opposition.

Scary stuff for some of us. But change is in the air, and we have seen this sort of thing before. Major Canadian Political Parties have been totally wiped out after a serious scandal that came to light just before an election.

This is the biggest scandal in Canadian history. By far. And we haven't even heard the HALF of it yet!







 

Each week we hear more and more about the Liberals stealing tax dollars and massive waste. Is it mismanagement on a biblical scale, or wholesale theft of billions of Canadian tax dollars?

Doesn't much matter. Canadian voters are totally fed up with it, and have made up their minds that it is time for a BIG change.

We are all counting the days until the next election. 

Watch and see.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

What polls are you reading Macnutt? Every poll that I have read (including the one I conducted here) puts the Liberals in as a small majority (or large minority) government, with the Conservatives and NDP battling it out for the Official Opposition, especially in the east.

I don't know where the Bloc stands these days, but I am sure they'll get at least a few seats again.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Strictly running on gut instinct. Out here, swingin in the breeze so that anyone who cares to can take a fair shot at me after election day. 









I had the very same feeling just before the massive defeat of the BC NDP. I had a very strong feeling that they'd get totally wiped out. Most everyone knew they were going to lose power, but even the most wild-eyed radical right wing pundits still were pegging them at fifteen or twenty seats after election day.

BC is, after all, a Province that is almost equally split between right and left and most people pointed out that a great number of NDP seats were simply unassailable.

Trouble is...they were using logic to make their predictions..not anger at a long term governing party who had disappointed pretty much everyone.









While I am a great fan of logic, I honestly believe that anger will prevail on Federal Election day in Canada.

Oh...and by the way.....

The BC NDP were reduced to a mere two seats on that particular election day. Today, after ruling the Province for a decade, they no longer even have Official Party status.

This wasn't so much a vote FOR the BC Liberals as it was a vote AGAINST the ruling NDP. This is not the first time that the Canadian electorate has used their collective voting power against a ruling party, instead of FOR one. 

The longer Paul Martin delays the election, the more scandalous dirt will surface about how terribly corrupt the Chretien Liberals truly were. Some of this dirt will inevitably splash onto Martin. I think that the very best thay can hope for is a razor thin majority...and that total defeat is well within the realm of possibilty.

Paul Martin, himself, could very well lose his own seat. Or be forced to resign when it becomes totally obvious to everyone in the country that he actually DID know a lot more about the massive theft of tax dollars than he has said he did.

We live in interesting times, indeed.


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

It's much too early to call the result.

The Conservatives will get a lift from the leadership contest, provided it goes well. Equally, the Liberals have been hurt recently.

But it is weeks before a contest and a lot can happen. It also depends on the Conservative platform. If they follow the line of the last election and campaign on the basis that we are losing out as a country and that the American Way is better then I think they will not swing Ontario.

Possibly the single biggest factor will be those who do not vote. Many Liberals will stay at home out of anger. Last time they came out because the other guy was a bit creepy. This time they are angry.

Should be fun to watch.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

with the conservatives backing harper to the tune of 59% (yesterday's Nation Pest headline), Canadians will see it's business as usual at the big C aka "the big 'L' "

Canadians like their healthcare and don't want to be involved in any foreign invasion. Two very important things that the Cs don't belive in.

I predict a drop in the Cs polling numbers and an increase in the Liberal numbers after Harper is annointed "king." 

Belinda's father is going to pretty pissed after spending all that good money buying votes.

Harper making grand statements that somehow he speaks for a silent majority when it comes to Canadian support for the war in Iraq, especially when he's speaking to an American audience

NOTE to jfpoole and posterboy - see above spelling of America.

The key to the election will be if the Liberals can take back some of the support they lost to the Bloc in Quebec.


----------



## Britnell (Jan 4, 2002)

I will wade into this next Monday!


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Again with the logic?







 

These are angry times not logical ones. Canadians are steamed and there is a fury in the land. They will have a lot more to be steamed about in the weeks leading up to an election.

Paul Martin is in for a very rough ride. And he knows it.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

I'm looking forward to Ralph's keynote address.  












> Saturday, March 20, 2004
> 8.00 am to 4.00 pm
> Delegate Registration Centre open MTCC - Level 600
> 
> ...


Sorry, cable only!


----------



## RicktheChemist (Jul 18, 2001)

.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

what? no coverage on the people's network? CBC
oh yeah. Don Cherry - the CBC's version of Ralphie (is this my round?) Klein

I forgot. Equal time.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Precisley, RTC...

The Bloc will win tons of seats in Quebec. Paul Martin may actually lose his own seat.  

The Conservatives will win a ton of seats in Ontario...possibly by a very small margin.

The Federal Liberals will be all but wiped out everywhere west of Canora ONT.

They may retain a few seats in Atlantic Canada...but I'd bet that they actually lose several out there, as well.

Bottom line?

Bye bye Liberals. Bye bye Paul Martin's hopes for the PMO's office. After more than a decade of waiting in the wings! 









Martin will be SERIOUSLY cheesed about this. Once he has been ejected from power, and has had time to think about it for a bit...he will begin to blame the guy who is truly responsible for this sudden fall from grace.

So will all of the long-term Federal Liberals who have gotten used to major cash infusions into their personal accounts each month.

They will all be spitting mad, and ready to freak out on the people they think are responsible for this sudden change in their personal fortunes.

THAT'S when we will see what has really been behind our beloved Liberal Party of Canada for so very long.







  

It will be a public orgy of finger-pointing and accusations, from within the Liberal Party, no less. EEEK!! 

Think the meltdown of the post-Mulrooney PC's was a major spectacle? Think that the wipeout of the Progressive Consevatives was a singular event? Never to be repeated again??

Then, brother...you aou ain't seen NOTHIN yet!

Trust me on this.


----------



## Brainstrained (Jan 15, 2002)

Macnutt, Canora is in Saskatchewan.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

macnutt refers to KENORA, Ontario on Lake of the Woods.

Beautiful spot. I lived there for three years, '77 through '80.

Cheers


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

While I think macnutt overestimates the magnitude of the loss of seats by the Liberals (I think they'll lose some but not enough to lose power), I have to ask how the people in Gagliano's constituency ever elected the guy? In the spotlight he's clearly utterly inept and without a bone in his body. He couldn't possibly have bought off the entire constituency. He's a disgrace to Canadians. He's the closest organism I've seen on the planet to Jabba the Hutt.

Unfortunately, the same ineptitude is true of many elected officials. Why are we selecting people who are incapable of leading an intelligent conversation, who have a disjointed view of personal responsibility and entitlement? 

All parties are similar in this respect. Have you heard the abysmal questions of Gagliano from the investigating committee? Unprofessional and self-serving. There's something to be said for the country to be ruled by the Supreme Court compared to the House on the Hill since those judges seem more in touch with the people than our elected officials.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macnutt proclaimed;


> The Conservatives will win a ton of seats in Ontario


define "ton"
5? 10? 20? 50? 75?
i guess 5 vs. 0 would be a "ton"
is that what you mean?

"ton?" you have to be joking


----------



## Brainstrained (Jan 15, 2002)

Yes, I know Macnutt is referring to Kenora, not Canora, but for someone who claims to know Canada as well as he does. . .


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Apologies, brainstrained. I am not terribly familiar with that particular segment of our great land...and there was a rather famous ship that used to ply these BC waters that was called "Canora". Perhaps I automatically transposed the spelling from my youthful memories (that old freighter nearly ran down the family yacht, when I was a lad).

Back to the subject at hand....

Alphonse Gagliano has just finished "testifying" before the Public Inquiry into the massive Liberal scandal that is currently dominating the news media here in Canada.

Gagliano...who is a major waste of skin....characterised himself as a "victim of the system" during his weak and bumbling testimony. He claimed that he "knew nothing" about the massive theft of taxpayer dollars that went on while he was running Public Works. This is especially odd since he and Jean Chretien were the two guys who set up the porogram that was used to steal all of those millions of tax dollars. They went way outside of regular channels and...according to the Auditor General...broke every rule in the book while setting the whole scam up AND while running it.   

So...lets see what we've got so far here....

The massive theft of taxpayer dollars by a group of guys who are the closest friends of Jean Chretien. They are all from Quebec, and the theft took place largely in Quebec. 

But the senior cabinet Minister from Quebec, Paul Martin (who was ALSO the Finance Minister during this period) claims he knew NOTHING about it!  

The guy who actually set the scam up with Jean Chretien also claims he knew NOTHING about it!

Jean Chretien, himself, is staying totally silent on the subject. But he HAS been seen visiting his massive wealth in the Caymans quite frequently and doing rather a lot of travel to China lately. (China doesn't have an extradition treaty with Canada. It is also one of the very best places to invest huge amounts of stolen money right now. The Chinese economy is growing at an exponential rate these days, and they don't care where the venture capitol comes from, at this point.)

A couple of the other Major Players in this fraud scheme are either "unable to testify due to bad health" or conveniently "out of the country" right now. Gee...go figure.

Several of the lesser Quebec minions who were key players in this crime have been summarily fired...without severance...but none of the kingpins have yet been put on trial. The only one who has appeared before the Inquiry...Gagliano...seems to be suffering from a strange sort of "memory gap" about all of this criminal activity right at the moment. While obviously protecting the Big Boss by keeping his mouth SHUT.

This is standard practise for organised crime figures who have been caught red-handed.

And there is a WHOLE LOT more dirt that hasn't yet been revealed. But WILL be, soon enough.  

Internal polling by the Federal Liberals indicates that they will be wiped out if they call an election right now. So they are going to wait for a while, and hope that it all blows over.

Good luck on THAT!









Once again, I should remind all of you that Canadians are more likely to vote _AGAINST_ a political Party than they are to vote _FOR_ one. Check out any number of major Canadian elections from the past decade and see for yourself.

The Liberals are cooked. Paul Martin is watching his dreams of glory vanish in a puff of smoke. The Canadian electorate is just waiting and biding their time before they can eject these crooks from power. Forever.

Watch and see.

[ March 20, 2004, 05:58 AM: Message edited by: macnutt ]


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Tiers will flow ......  












> Conservative Party officials acknowledged yesterday they could use a few extra weeks to get their house in order before heading into an election campaign after this weekend's leadership convention.
> "We'll be prepared to go when the election is called," said one, "but there are things to do."
> Still, party officials blanched yesterday at the assessment of Alberta Premier Ralph Klein, who said before arriving in Toronto for the convention that the "brand new party" is likely to be in a rebuilding process for four years -- a full parliamentary mandate.
> "We've got to jolly up our keynote speaker," a party official said in reference to Mr. Klein's role at the convention this afternoon.
> ...


Globe


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

You are







a pretty fair sized hole with your predictions MacNutt.
Course that just might put them to rest permanently


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Sun Media's Michael Coren would have you believe that macnutt just may be right with his predictions.

Read it here. 

Cheers


----------



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

One wonders if the possible Conservative-Bloc "union" to take a minority government status away from the Liberals will be possible...or if it will survive? Personally, I would feel more secure under a Liberal government with an alliance with the NDP than a New C/Bloc Q government. Yes, we certainly "live in interesting times" here in Canada.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

"Sun Media'"  more sensational than sane.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

from Corent's article;


> I've even heard some hardened New Democrats and labour leaders tell me they would rather have a Conservative government in power than more of the Liberal chokehold on the throat of this country. That, let me tell you, is quite something.


So this means that NDP-ers are now going to vote the big C?
ludricous

The key will be Quebec. They have been embarassed by the scandal and running back to their safe haven of the Bloc that wil tell them all is well and "patronage" is a good thing.
However, Quebecers have also seen what voting for the Bloc does, or not does, for them in terms of federal power.

Martin is billungual and live in Quebec. He could shore up support in the weeks before an election. History has shown that Quebecers have a way of going against the polls.

Convervative-Bloc alliance? Not likely. Fool me once....

left leaning liberals will vote NDP (aka "their concience")
Martin being is much more of a conservative in his fiscal policies.
Bay Street has been noticably quiet. This usually means they like the status quo. Martin is good for business. He is a Conservative in a red suit. "Red Torie" used to be the term.
When the election is called the Liberal machine will have money thrown at them from Bay Street et al. The C's war chest is almost empty. The NDP are not much better off.

Wait for the Liberal tv, radio spots. Lots and often will be the strategy.

The Liberals are also massing a pretty good slate of candidates, something Coren failed, or didn't want, to see.

As I have said before, the key more than ever, will be Quebecers and they are a difficult group to predict.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Not so Michael Coren, MacDoc.

He is a gifted writer and widely respected for his sane and honest Christian viewpoint.

Cheers


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> Not so Michael Coren, MacDoc.


???


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

"honest Christian viewpoint"....... yeah eh  

Michael must be killing himself laughing at that comment


----------



## Brainstrained (Jan 15, 2002)

Michael Coren is obviously more popular out west than in Ontario.

I don't remember the last time The Toronto Sun carried his column.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Harper wins the leadership.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Let me be first to: zzzzzz........


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

but true - Macnutt has his New American Hero


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Klein really needs to start drinking again.
His "speech" was so boring.
I should have taped it for the nights when I cannot sleep.
Hmmmmm. That gives me an idea for a business opportunity....

Everything old is new again.
CA, Reform, Conservative party of Canada.
dress it up, it still smells...

Harper is now really under the gun
if he cannot provide a C gov't this time around, he'll have no excuses about "divided right", blah blah blah

Mike Harris really wishes he had run

Ontario voters will be disenfranchised by the big Harper win.
His "message" plays well out west, but not east of the Manitoba-Ontario border.

The big question is how the Liberal weekend telephone polling does in Martin v. Harper

The election call will depend on that data.

The Cs had a chance to become a national party, but with Harper's overwhelming 1st ballot victory, the party will once again be a regional entity.

The Cs speak about "alternative healthcare", but we all know it's code for 2 tiered medicine. Something the majority of the Canadian electorate will not stand for.

And Haprer further dissapointed with his reaching out to the U.S.
Last time I checked, 99.9 %they didn't vote in Canadian elections. Dr. G., excepted.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Harper comes across pretty smug. 
He made some serious errors in the CBC interview with smart assed cracks that were inappropriate to the circumstances.
He reminds me of Mike Harris which I guess will appeal to the right wingers. Less folksy.

Winston Churchill is his hero.







Well we'll see how he plays nationally.
If the PCs go the what's wrong with the Libs route they will not do as well as if they layout an alternative vision of the way key policies

The PCs should NOT be talking ethics with their history both Provincial and National. I don't think Canadians, in particular those in Ontario have any respect at all for negative ad campaigns.

Don't tell us what you don't like about your opponent.  
Tell us what YOU are going to do in the major policy arena.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Harper's appeal has yet to be manufactured. Certainly they have to soften his "Child of Dracula"  visage and his anal retentive  persona. 
Remember the duck-like Presto M.?

He however had policy.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

One of the reasons that Harper came across as "so smug" is because he did so very well in Ontario during the leadership vote. He was the lone western candidate against two Ontarians...but he smoked em both in the first ballot.  

The next Federal Election will be characterised by two inescapable and powerful forces:

1) Vast numbers of Canadian voters who are totally disgusted with the Federal Liberals and who want them OUT. No matter what the cost.

2) Vast numbers of loyal Liberal voters who are so totally turned off by all of the available choices that they simply will not vote in this election.

Add to that, the newly united right and the newly revitalised NDP under Layton, both draining away votes from the Libs (not to mention the Bloc in Quebec which has seen a tremendous upsurge in the polls since the scandal broke)....and you have a recipie for disaster for our long-term "natural ruling party".

Prepare yourselves people. Change is in the air.

Change is good.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Harper was elected with 56% or so of the vote. About two thirds of eligible PC party members actually cast a vote. He was therefore elected based on 37% of people with a PC membership actually voting for him. I'd say voter apathy isn't exactly restricted to Liberal supporters nor is Mr. Harper a slam-dunk leader.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

> The PCs should NOT be talking ethics with their history both Provincial and National. I don't think Canadians, in particular those in Ontario have any respect at all for negative ad campaigns.





> I'd say voter apathy isn't exactly restricted to Liberal supporters nor is Mr. Harper a slam-dunk leader.


Interesting that it was not the west whose votes elected Harper. Rather it was the Ontario vote that carried the day to make him leader. Perhaps a sign of a change in the status quo? 

Just an observation.

Cheers


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

It will very much depend on the manner in which the campaign is conducted.
If the PCs go negative, as they have been to date, they will get little attention in Ontario other than the single party will regain a few seats lost on the "Lib up the middle".

If they offer 
a) no negative campaigning - let the Liberals self destruct 
b) rational middle of the road policieswith the "priorities" covered
c) shake off the suspicions of "Alliance in disguise"

Then they stand to benefit as some Lib supporters will vote NPD and the "PC up the middle" strategy may work in some areas in Ontario.

The other thing in the PCs favour is that Ontario tends to vote contrary Fed/Provincial.

The Bloc is a real puzzle and we could see a 4 way minority situation.

The NDP seem to be doing this the smart way right now - building grass roots organization with not a whole lot of Lib bashing - the Libs are floundering all on their own and that's a smart approach by the NDP to let them.

If Harper keeps up the smart assed smug approach he'll find any progress stalled as the voters are very very suspicious of both "historical" parties.

If Quebec figures the Bloc will be the "swing seats" for any minority situation they may well exercise their traditional "in our best interest" moveand elect enouogh to make a serious difference. 

Should be an interesting parliament.


----------



## Britnell (Jan 4, 2002)

Stronach did much better than I thought she would. Amazing what money can buy.

Clement did much much worse than I thought he would. I'm surprised that Harper won on first ballot, but did expect him to win.

Harper has clearly been given the message, drift to the centre, court the Red Tories, or risk losing the election.

I think we will see a Liberal minority.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

I would tend to agree with you, Britnell. IF the vote were held right this very moment.

But it will be held no more than 36 days after Paul Martin decides to call an election. That is some time from now...and that's plenty of time for much more Liberal dirt to surface, as a result of the 18+ seperate investigations that are currently being conducted into the corruption of the Chretien government. To the total disgust of the average Canadian voter, BTW.  

I have said this before, and I'll say it again:

Canadians are more well known for voting OUT a Government than they are for voting one INTO power. And this next election has all the signs of being a classic Canadian "Turf the Bums" nationwide vote.

Who is left when the dust clears...NDP, Conservatives or Bloc...and in what measure of power sharing...will be a side issue on voting day. 

I agree with macdoc. The next Parliament will be an interesting one. To say the least.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

The Budget certainly took the financial control issue head on.  

I noticed the Provincial Libs here also made some changes today.

I find it interesting that a number of companies like Apple and IBM and GE went through this "management upheaval" a few years back. IBM was losing billions of dollars and turned around with much tighter control systems.

Time for nations to do the same.  

BUT I just learned an interesting thing.

Canada's debt to GDP ratio was 68% in 1995 the US was 61%,
The US today after dropping to 58% or so is back at 61% and very likely to be incredibly worse once the numbers are in for this year.

Canada's???? *42%* ....that is awesome and we should all be congratulated from coast to coast for whatever part we played in that immense economic turnaround.

Now all we need to see is that the resulting benefits are managed better.

more please.......


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

The budget specifically mentions that the GDP:debt ratio is slated to fall to 38% by 2006/7 and that the target is 25%. Why? To tool up the country to deal with the anticipated burdens of the aging population. In other words, to put money into care rather than debt repayments.

The rest of the budget kinda sucked though - not sure what $3000 is going to do for a first year student apart from buy a month of booze.









Can't get the Flash site to work in Safari though: http://www.fin.gc.ca/budget04/mm/flashe/flash_e.html 

Maybe its Windows only..... [update, it does work, its just very slow in loading - must be all those beaurocrats checking in on their boondoggles].


----------



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

Macdoc, we have tried to do our part here in NL with 80% of the equalization payments "clawed back" because of Hibernia and the fact that we received all of $32 million for the energy that Quebec Hydro was able to sell (for $1.3 billion), energy which came from Churchill Falls, Labrador. Sadly, we still have the highest per-capita ratio of children living in poverty of the 10 provinces.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I think Martin has put forth a very slippery chunk of ice for the opposition to get a grip on.
The Tories are left only with campaigning on tax cuts while the NDP can only campaign on additional spending which may be deficit.

That pushes the Tories into negative campaigning which I personally think will NOT fly.

I think much will depend on riding by riding efforts and the PCs have little money or organization. We'll see.
 

Liberal Dreams will have to wait 

from today's Star. Not a bad analysis tho I disagree with the last paragraph I think Canada has a proud place in the world and a 21st century economy. It needs political overhaul.

from the article
_In a single paragraph, Goodale captures the essence of a government that suddenly seems terrified of its own shadow.

"Some have suggested we will throw fiscal caution to the wind," he told Parliament. "We will not. Some have said we will engage in a pre-election spending spree. We will not. Some have said we will play fast and loose with the economic progress Canadians have worked so hard to achieve. We will not."_ 

That has Martin's stamp written all over it. It's the way he handled the deficit and I for one want slow but sure progress over time but with better management and oversight than we've had.

There was a clear lesson from Ontario about "promises" unable to be kept. I hope Ontario remembers that on Federal election day.
Martin's good management is what we really need right now especially as our southern neighbours deal with their immense internal issues. 

[ March 24, 2004, 07:00 AM: Message edited by: MacDoc ]


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

I have just heard some third hand "insider" information about the lastest internal polling results by the Federal Liberals. It's really juicy stuff!  

Get this...they have just officially dropped off the electoral map, according to their own pollsters. At this particular point in time, it looks like a total wipeout for them. A small handful of Liberal seats left in southern Ontario and a few in eastern Canada. Even these are in doubt. And Paul Martin's own seat is showing a sure defeat at this point. Has been for the last three polls, apparently.

Holy snappin ar*eh*les! No wonder they're running scared!  

And it's only going to get worse in the coming weeks, as more and more dirt is revealed by the 18+ investigations that are currently underway.

Tough luck, Paul. Say hi to Kim Campbell and John Turner when you join them on the ash-heap of Canadian wannabe Prime Ministers who ruled for a short time...but couldn't actually survive a real election.

Too bad, too. 

Martin probably could have been a fairly competent PM if he hadn't had to follow a crook like Chretien.

Guess we'll never know, now.


----------



## canuck1975 (Dec 7, 2003)

> Martin probably could have been a fairly competent PM if he hadn't had to follow a crook like Chretien.


Kinda like Kim... and maybe even John, although I seriously doubt _that_.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

The usual garbage eh MacnNutt. Been browsing the tabloids again???

Reality..........

Harper chickens out on debate - 

_March 23, 2004 
Challenge to Harper 

Harper Won’t Talk Budget With Layton, Mclellan - Backs out of CBC Newsworld, afraid to defend his old ideas, as debate hypocrisy grows. 
OTTAWA – Conservative Leader Stephen Harper continues to duck NDP Leader Jack Layton, today backing out of a scheduled appearance on CBC Newsworld in which he was to discuss the federal budget with Layton and Liberal Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan. 

Harper, who last year backed out of about 10 discussions with Layton on issues such as the war on Iraq, same-sex marriage and the last federal budget backed out this morning. No word on whether McLellan is an also ran, the excuse Harper gave on the weekend for turning down Layton’s debate challenge. >_ 

Hoping for a win by default I guess.

This is a very critical electorate and if there is nothing but negativity and no real policy then people will stop listening very very quickly. Sort of like around here.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Macnutt, I challenge you to verify this:


> I have just heard some third hand "insider" information about the lastest internal polling results by the Federal Liberals. It's really juicy stuff!


.... or is this the usuall j*****ss BS from macnutt ....  

I am reminded of his other "insider sources "







:


> Word is that he is already up and walking around. He has a golf match planned for next week, and will be jetskiing at a major resort by the end of March. He's already booked time there......Rumor has it that Moore, himself, has been questioning the severity of the punishment that has been meted out to his assailant.


macnutt, why is it so easy for everyone here at ehMac to post URL's to verify information and why is it so difficult for you?

Now that you have high speed service, we just seem to be getting high speed bull**** from ya!









Do let us know what's in your water before you market it eh macnutt?









[ March 26, 2004, 05:33 PM: Message edited by: macello ]


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Perhaps to much Ethylene in ye olde spring water

_Delphi's oracle was just stoned August 16, 2003

The oracle was as high as Mount Parnassus, reports Robin McKie.

*She advised generals about invasions, told citizens about the fates of their investments* S and even warned Oedipus about the dangers of murdering his father and marrying his mother.

Yet the oracle at Delphi was not blessed with prophetic vision, scientists have discovered. In fact, she was high on alcoholic vapours.

This is the conclusion of scientists - writing in this month's Scientific American - who have found that the oracle chamber near Mount Parnassus was built over a geological fault from which seeped ethane and ethylene gases. As a result, the oracle, the temple maiden who uttered Delphi's prophecies, was probably in a permanent narcotic state. The oracle's utterings, upon which so much of ancient Greek life depended, were not the words of Apollo, the god of prophecy, but the babblings of a drunk or glue-sniffer.

"The petrochemical-rich layers in the limestone formations most likely produced ethylene, a gas that induces a trance-like state, that could have risen through fissures," says the team led by Louisville University's Professor John Hale.

The oracle was typically depicted in Greek art as sitting on a tall, three-legged stool, with a laurel sprig in one hand and a cup of water filled from the spring that bubbled into her chamber. In a trance, she answered questions of supplicants.

Plutarch noted that she sat in a chamber deep in the Delphic temple's bowels, from which a sweet-smelling gas emanated. He linked this with her trances, though scholars later concluded her behaviour was probably a sham. Research by geologists has shown that the chamber rested above two intersecting fault lines.

"This intersection made the rock more permeable and provided pathways along which both ground water and gases were able to rise," the team says.

Water analysis from springs around the temple discovered high levels of methane, ethane and ethylene. "Because ethylene has a sweet odour, the presence of this gas supports Plutarch's description of a gas that smelled like expensive perfume."

Ethylene fumes produce an effect in test patients in which they experience trances, euphoria, out-of-body sensations and amnesia. Occasionally, they suffer spasms and can even die. Ancient texts record that such fates were also suffered by the oracle. On one or two occasions, maidens serving as the oracle died after convulsions.

"God though he was, Apollo had to speak through the voices of mortals," say the researchers, "and he had to inspire them with stimuli that were part of the natural world."_ 

Sounds all too familiar eh. MacNutt is on the shaky coast. Spring water.....given to "flights of fancy"/
Or maybe it's the methane from the those free range walking steaks.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

No matter who forms the next government, this new stamp says it all!










Cheers


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

So what's the problem Sinc? ....... who likes taxes? ...... or are there problems in Klein's neo-con tax paradise?



> ...... income from provincial taxes and royalties -- exceed total expenditures. In other words, the Alberta government could be self-sufficient if it wanted to be. It could fund all of its spending without taking a nickel in transfers from Ottawa. That's something no other province can boast.


http://www.canada.com/edmonton/edmontonjournal/columnists/story.html?id=8bee65c2-a880-4c21-8e7e-21ce731d8a51 

UNITED NATIONS -- The United Nations Human Development Report has ranked 162 countries according to per capita income, health care, life expectancy and educational levels.

Top 20:

1. Norway
2. Australia
3. Canada
4. Sweden
5. Belgium
6. United States
7. Iceland
8. Netherlands
9. Japan
10. Finland
11. Switzerland
12. Luxembourg
13. France
14. Britain
15. Denmark
16. Austria
17. Germany
18. Ireland
19. New Zealand
20. Italy


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

> No matter who forms the next government, this new stamp says it all!


I guess I have to be more precise:

No matter who forms the next FEDERAL government, this new stamp says it all!

But the stamp should have been the hint for savvy readers. I don't recall the last time Alberta issued one.

Cheers


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

> hint for savvy readers


SINC, We know that screwing is easy ..... and unscrewing not.

Since the complaint comes from AB, I'm remembering firewalls....... separation ........ alienation ..... etc.

Any solutions from Kleinland for Canadians?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

i don't hear klein complaining about the big cheque Ottawa wrote for the beef farmers in AB
or are gov't handouts ok in this one case?
Klein should crack down on the farmers that fed animal meat to herbivore cattle
ask any grade 6 student what cows are supposed to eat
i doubt "pigs and cows" makes the list
i bet that "grass" is top of the list
i don't hear a big cry to investigate the cattle producers nor the feed producers
why?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

> Any solutions from Kleinland for Canadians?


Sure.

Stop voting Liberal.

Cheers


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

> Stop voting Liberal.


Sorry SINC  ........ We tried that ..... Conservatives with Mulroney







(From 1984 to 1993 the Mulroney government ran up the debt from $170 billion to approximately $450 billion.) and again with Harris







in ON and got $6,000,000,000 in the red along with a 75% cut in public safety services ......... 

Harper without the oil patch???? ......


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Course maybe that means we should vote NDP and really get Klein's shorts in a knot.
The polls sure indicate a strong NDP showing.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Ontario is still smarting from the last time and NDP gov't was voted in here
I don't think voters will forget too soon
(yes i know it was only on a provincial level and we are discussing federal politics, but you have to agree that one does influence the other)


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Would you like to defend that Michael.
Smarting how.
Tell me what major wrong of any kind that Bob Rae did that was not far far overshadowed by PC malfeasance and Liberal nonchalance ( which is why Bob woke up one morning and much to his and David Peterson's surprise it was the original Freaky Friday )

Rae Days were a humane way of dealing with the issues.
Hydro was not his problem and in fact he got started on correcting it.

I don't recall much in the way of scandal tho they were certainly not fully in governing mode - kinda hard being in opposition all the time - a second term just might have been a boon to Ontario cuz it was just a slide and sleight of hand budgets by the Tories.


----------



## canuck1975 (Dec 7, 2003)

Bob Rae's biggest mistake: not introducing a provincially run auto-insurance agency.

Bob Rae's second biggest mistake: including the redifinition of the word "spouse" in Bill 167.


----------



## Brainstrained (Jan 15, 2002)

Rae days may have been a humane way of dealing with the province's financial crisis, but the unions and most of their members didn't see it that way.

And as he jettisoned longstanding NDP policies, such as provincial auto insurance, many unions and longtime supporters saw the break as complete.

And still do.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Rae saw the need for a more centrist policy platform. 
To get into power the NDP needs to shed the image of being in Labour's pocket which I think they are doing.

Ontarians are likely warmer to a Rae style government these days than ever before. Maybe the country too.

BTW what is he up to these days???


----------



## Brainstrained (Jan 15, 2002)

Rae's working for a Toronto law firm - Goodman Phillips & Vineberg, and is available for the occasional freelance political gig.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Ever since this massive scandal erupted onto the Canadian conciousness...and became a major topic of conversation around the company watercooler...all of the polling numbers I have seen have indicated that the Conservatives have been gaining ground, while the Liberals are losing. Big Time.

Nothing I've seen would indicate any sort of sudden rise in popularity for the Federal NDP. Nothing at all.

Care to post some links to solid poll numbers that show the Federal NDP gaining major ground these days, macdoc?

I stand before you, ready to be enlightened to the true reality.  

Honest.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Hi fellow ehMacians.

You can get the latest poll results here if you want to see how your party is doing nationally.


2004 election coverage 

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Having just visited your "unbiased link" MacGuiver, begs the question:

Which Liberal riding association do you work for?

Cheers


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

After hearing...on tonight's news...the latest report by the Auditor General about the eight BILLION dollars (of tax money) that has been spent by the Federal Liberals on "countering terrorism" since 9/11...

And, after hearing her well-studied contention that we are STILL "shockingly unprepared" after ALL of this money has been spent...

(For Example: 25 THOUSAND stolen Canadian passports every single year...and no one in the border guard or Immigration Canada is informed of the serial numbers or names on these passports. Numerous major international terrorists on the INTERPOL lists...many of whom are currently LIVING in Canada, but Canadian authorities are prevented from knowing their names or addresses. While some of them are actually being financially supported by the Liberal Canadian Government, no less!)

It goes on and on. I won't bore you any further. Read the papers if you want to know the whole sordid story. Or turn on a TV at news time. ANY channel will do.  

Bottom line?

We need to get rid of the sad shmucks who have been stealing masses of money from us for so many years...and who have so totally mismanaged just about every single government program during that time.  

Paul Martin MAY be a good guy...(although he himself is under investigation for avoiding Canadian taxes right now, and may, eventually, be indicted)...but there is NO WAY that he can reform this Federal Liberal mess. Not in a decade of sundays!

It is too well entrenched and runs WAYYY too deep! Paul Martin could not even begin to scratch the surface of this criminal mess, no matter HOW hard he tried.

If you want to get rid of the SLIME, then you have to DRAIN THE SWAMP!! 

Want to do something POSITIVE for Canada?  

Then I have a suggestion....

Follow what SINC and many others are saying right now.

STOP voting LIberal!  

Give them a well-deserved break from absolute power over all of us. Vote for ANYONE ELSE!!

Just DON'T vote for the same old batch of crooks. Unless you want the same old batch of theft and mismanagement on a grand scale, to continue. Forever.

Your choice.

[ March 30, 2004, 11:47 PM: Message edited by: macnutt ]


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

> STOP voting LIberal!


I love it when macnutt begs! ......







..... in vain!


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Read the post again, macello. 

I'm not begging. I'm just stating the facts. And inviting anyone who chooses to read this post to go out and look for more data on the subject. (It shouldn't be too hard to find. It's all around us, in long form, right now.)   

I would invite you to do the very same.

It might be quite a revelation for you, macello. If you care to listen to the current reality.

Or not.

Either way, it's your choice.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

the problem with the invasion of Iraq is that the sanctions had stripped Hussein of his power
no fly zones
oil for food
Iraq was toothless

so Amerika (that was especially for someone on ehMac) removes Hussein - a dictator they had previously supported (see Rummy with Hussein photo op during Bush I)

the big problem now is this;
ANY country with enough "kohones" can invade another citing "pre-emptive" reasons
the world is NOT safer
BushCo. has made it less safe and less peaceful
this is good for arms manufacturers and war mongers and fear mongerers
bad for peace and Joe and Jane citizen who just want peace and quiet

The U.S. has opened the door for any bully country to invade another without any good reason
the UN has had its teeth pulled and goodbye "global cooperation" except when it comes to making your Nikes

the example set by the "coalition of the killing" is a horrible one
we probably won't see a turn back to peace processes in my life time circa 2020

in my life i saw;
the fall of the soivet union
the fall of the Berlin wall
China taking on free enterprise
Int'l space station
global cooperation on fusion reactors
commercializaion of space vehicles
Hubble
human genome
environmental issues becoming important on the agendas of real power brokers
European economic union
former eastern bloc countries joining NATO
UN that started to have real power

*then* rise of fascism just south of the Canadian border - the last place anyone would ever look
now it all goes to hell

makes me want to cry
we were oh so damn close


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Considering how much flak that George W. has taken for the invasion of Iraq, I wouldn't expect that he would be planning any new adventures right about now.

Bottom line?

It's hardly a "carte blanche" for any "bully nation" to invade a lesser one. Quite the contrary, actually.

The Old Soviet Union...and it's client states of Cuba, El Salvador, North Korea et al....never gave two hoots what the rest of the world thought when they dove into another country with guns ablazing, and started killing everyone who stood in their way.

And they SURE didn't care what their own people thought about it at all. Because they had NO SAY in the matter. None whatsoever. 

But they sure did manage to push the world agenda their own way for a while! No question about it.

Macspectrum, macello and everyone else who is of a similar mind....

Care to comment on the obvious difference between the United States and the Old Soviet Union (and it's well-trained puppet states)?

Care to speculate what would have happened if the Soviets had won the Cold War, instead of losing it, and were now in charge of EVERYTHING?

What if THEY were the dominant force on the planet right now? Instead of the USA?

What if socialism and Marxist philosophy had prevailed? What if US style capitalist market-driven economics had failed?

Where would we be then?

Would you still be totally free to criticise the dominant power? Would you still be free to call them names? On a public forum? Without fear of being arrested?

My Cuban friends dare not speak out about Fidel or his failed Marxist State, no matter how bad things are in that "workers paradise". Many of them have already been hauled off and jailed for saying or thinking the "wrong thoughts".

Consider this, the next time you wax eloquent about "Amerika" and it's excursions abroad.

It could be SO MUCH Worse.

Trust me on this.

[ March 31, 2004, 02:30 AM: Message edited by: macnutt ]


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Macspectrum said:


> Canadians don't want to be America Jr.


Exactly!

Which is why, in spite of the scandal, Harper and his newly usurped Regressive Conservative division of the Republican Party won't form the government.

The Liberals, under Martin, have made another lurch to the right. Martin is, after all, the dude who put our healthcare system into the current mess that it is now in, by withdrawing much of the Federal money from it, leaving it to the likes of Klein, Harris and Campbell to try and drive the final stake through it's heart.

So Canadians have a choice between conservative and ultra-conservative (I wouldn't say that the NDP have a real chance of forming government). 

I think most Canadians are smart enough to know and have long enough memories from the Mulroney years, to realize that if Harper's crew got in, it would be only a matter of time before they got their noses buried in the trough.

Maybe we'll end up with a Liberal minority, with the NDP holding the balance of power. That would sure be interesting!


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> with the NDP holding the balance of power.


it may be the Bloc
with a minority gov't and 4 parties, the Liberals would have their choice of the other 3
with whom could they sleep with?
The Bay St. types wouldn't like a Liberal/NDP alliance
Liberal/Unholy Alliance gives legitimacy to Harper et al
Bloc is a separatist movement with lots of closet PC backroom boys, some a little richer courtesy of Stronach and Company
tough choices


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

The Federal Liberals are going to suffer a massive defeat on election day.

The next time we Canadians get to experience a true democracy (for a single day only) we will be intent upon dumping the crooks who have mismanaged pretty much everything and stolen masses of tax dollars from us while doing it.

Their sole claim to fame is the "Balanced Budget"...which was accomplished by shifting the costs to the Provinces, instead of actually solving the problem.

We Canadian taxpayers are just as much in debt as we ever were. Some of us are in much WORSE shape, than we were before Paul Martin "Balanced the Budget".

And pretty much every Canadian now realises that Jean Chretien was busily lining his pockets with our hard-earned tax dollars while he was spending his decade in office.

Each and every day we are treated to new horrific revelations about how terribly corrupt the Federal Liberals really are, by the Auditor General.

Paul Martin is trying to clean things up...but he'd have to fire two thirds of the Liberal Party to actually DO it. And then THEY"D be busy suing the Canadian taxpayer for "wrongful dismissal" if he did!    

Besides...Paul Martin himself is under investigation for tax evasion by the RCMP. He may yet be indicted. There is NO question that he has hidden hundreds of millions from the Canadian taxman while conducting business with the Federal Government. While he was Finance Minister, in fact! 

And, right now the Chretienistas are actively battling with the Martinites, as we speak. Each is busy trying to point a finger at the other in order to explain the stolen millions of tax dollars. Billions, actually...when you add up all the money that has gone missing over the last ten years of Federal Liberal mismanagement.

It's a serious bloodbath. A major session of political infighting. A Party that is tearing itself apart, as we speak! Who knows WHO will come out on top. Who really cares?

All I really know is just exactly what the Federal Liberals already know from their constant internal polling, since the scandal erupted into the public eye. That, plus the obvious mood of the Nation.

Guess what?

The Liberals are FINISHED! Done like dinner!

Who will pick up the pieces and form a new Canadian Government, once the "natural ruling party" have been reduced to a couple dozen scattered seats? Or LESS?

I have no idea.

But it should be a fun ride! Fasten your seatbelts...the very best is yet to come!   

Change is a comin! Trust me on this.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

> the Liberals would have their choice of the other 3
> with whom could they sleep with?


I would think that if the Liberals were in a minority government situation, it would have to be a coalition with the NDP.

I imagine that Harper's party will focus during the next election on exactly what manner of filthy, crooked scumbags they think the Liberals are. That's their best shot. So to then turn around and get in bed with those same filthy, crooked scumbags would look pretty hypocritical to their supporters. Harper has also said that they will not partner with the Bloc under any circumstances.

For Martin to partner with the Bloc would be pretty bad optics too.

Harper spoke out this month about a Liberal-NDP coalition, which means he must think it's a very real possibility. He said, "In their own way, they are capable of doing as much damage to Canada as the Bloc Québécois, when put inside a governing coalition." NDP just as harmful as Bloc, Harper says 

Layton said, earlier this month, that he would not rule out supporting the Liberals in a minority situation. He said that he would require that the Liberals commit to a referendum on proportional representation, which would probably end Liberal domination of Parliament. Harper's boys are on record as supporting pro-rep also.

Trudeau later said about the coalition that he formed with the David Lewis NDP in the 70's, that it wasn't much of a stretch for him to support the NDP policies anyway. I imagine that Martin might start choking on his lunch if he was forced to co-operate with the NDP. Even though he appears to be under some sort of illusion that he's a Liberal, I think he's just trying to distance himself from Harper's knuckle-draggers.

Some of the pollsters are indicating that the Liberals, as of right now, would just fall short of a majority (all predictions of "serious bloodbaths" aside). Of course they're trying to translate national polls of popular support into first-past-the-post seat totals, which is probably mostly voodoo.

The next election sure is going to be interesting.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

*And pretty much every Canadian now realises that Jean Chretien was busily lining his pockets with our hard-earned tax dollars while he was spending his decade in office.*

Surely, if this were true, you would have been able to supply us with a link supporting your claims by now. At this point, I'd even like to see some anecdotal evidence from someone other than Macnutt that this is true. At least then we'd know he wasn't alone in his theories.

*Amerika (that was especially for someone on ehMac)*

Jeez, hold a grudge much? Though I notice you've been a little more discriminating with the term lately (and that is good).


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Jeeze, Posterboy...haven't you figured it all out yet?

Who do you think that Alphonse Gagliano was protecting when he went before the Public Inquiry? Why do you suppose that Paul Martin was so cold toward Chretien at the recent public funeral of one of their colleagues? Why do you suppose that Martin has been busy firing or replacing pretty much ALL of King Jean's old henchemen? Since well before the sponsorship scandal broke?

It's pretty clear to everyone. Jean was the Kingpin. The Godfather. He enabled all of these many scams and promised protection to all of his capos. In return, they kicked a percentage of their skimmed tax dollars up to him.

This is standard organised crime stuff. Basic kindergarten mob activity, but on a big scale over many many years.

Or do you think that there were just a few independant middle level bureaucrats stealing all these hundreds of millions of tax dollars, for almost a decade?

And that Jean Chretien used his absolute power to protect them from prosecution out of the goodness of his heart? For most of a decade? Gee what a nice guy he is.
















Wake up.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

No need to condescend Macnutt, just post a link to an editorial, a blurb, anything that even speculates that money is even missing.

I'm (still) not saying it's not true, just asking you to make it look less like you're making it up.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Turn on a TV set. ANY channel. Read a newspaper. ANY newspaper.

Hundreds of millions of tax dollars are missing, according to the Auditor General. Hundreds of millions more can't easily be accounted for because there is "no paperwork" to show where it all went.

That's why there are 18+ seperate investigations going on right now into what has come to be known as "the BIGGEST political scandal in Canadian history".

I am not making this up.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Hi Sinc



> Having just visited your "unbiased link" MacGuiver, begs the question:
> 
> Which Liberal riding association do you work for?
> 
> Cheers


I did a google search for 2004 canadian election polls and that link came up. I know the major media use ipsos-Reid and Ekos quite a bit so I wasn't suspicious of the numbers (Come to think of it maybe I should be  ) however if the site was biased they could leave out a poll if it didn't favor there party I guess.

As for working for the Liberal Party...
Quite the opposite my friend. I want this corrupt government out of here as bad as you. 

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

from the B & M article mentioned above;
_
The NDP would use budget surpluses -- routinely used to pay down federal debt -- to fund more government spending.


NDP proposals for revamping cities include sharing fuel-tax revenues with municipalities, a permanent national public housing program and a national infrastructure program with a focus on clean water. The party would oppose privatization.
_

Do my eyes deceive me? Jack Layton says he would pay down the debt?
Up is down. Black is white. Nothing makes sense anymore.


----------



## Brainstrained (Jan 15, 2002)

I don't think the Grits care about whom they might have to crawl into bed with to hold onto power.

They would probably prefer the option of having to court and sweet talk all three opposition parties.

Which just happens to explain how they've become the natural ruling party in Canada and their questionable reputation.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Sinc and the overwhelming majority of Albertans haven't voted Liberal in years.
Stephen Harper embodies the evil that is the hidden agenda of the "Unholy Alliance" party.
Two tiered health care labelled as "choice of health care."
Oh yeah, that's what the majority of Canadians want.
Canadians would like a viable alternative to the Liberals to punish them BUT Canadians will not shoot themselves in the foot just to do so.
The Conservatives just don't see what Canadians really want.
Protection of their social services.
Canadians don't want to be America Jr.
Alberta already is Texas North. That is much too close for most Canadians. They see what "scotch swizzling" leaders do. Hidden agendas. No social conscience. That's the evil that the Conservatives wish to put over Canadians. If the Cs were in power, we'd be at war in Iraq. Show of hands who wants that? Oh yeah, over 70% of Canadians DON'T
Neo-conservatism doesn't fly in this country, except for one small oil rich part of it.
Give me multi-culturalism, health care, day care, welfare and I"ll live with the high taxes. Most Canadians feel that way too.
Money scandals? Yeah, it's bad. But not as bad as pay per use health care.

Why doesn't Harper et al just come out and publicly say; "We will NOT alter your healthcare so that it either costs you other than taxes nor allow for "those that can afford it" to pay for "optional health care."

If Harper ever did that, I might just start taking him seriously. Although, if he ever did say that, his own party would take him out for a long walk off a short pier. (metaphor lost on flat landers)

Oh and one more thing.
Harper stated that he speaks for the majority of Canadians when he said he supported the war in Iraq.
I emailed him and called his office to ask about which majority of Canadians he was talking about.
Reply = 0. Emails and messages = 7.

Prime Minister, my ass.



[ March 31, 2004, 01:08 AM: Message edited by: MACSPECTRUM ]


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Good points, macspectrum. As always.  

But a tad biased, in my humble opinion. (no offense meant, my old friend).  

Most Canadians are quite happy that we are NOT wallowing in the big mess that is the current reality in Iraq. Fair enough. NOBODY would want to voluntarily stick their collective heads in THAT particular bucket of sh*t.

But many of them actually DID get into that particular mess. Against the wishes of their own electorate.

Much of Europe and, for that matter, most of the rest of the WORLD has no desire to be a part of this nasty mess right now. In fact, they NEVER did.

But...way down deep...we ALL know that a true self-determining democracy in the middle east would be a HUGE advance over what was there before.

It might just make the very first REAL difference in that violent and war-torn area in the past century. Or for the past four centuries or so, for that matter.









The Iraqis want this change. So does the rest of the planet. DESPERATELY. ( The whole of the United Nations wanted it too, by the way...but they were in total gridlock and couldn't do a thing about it. As usual.)

The whole english speaking world signed on to make this welcome change happen. At great expense. And great loss of life. Just as they have always done, when faced with a serious threat.

Except Canada.  

Under the total mismanagement of the Chretien Liberals, Canada turned their collective backs on the rest of the english speaking world. At a time of real need. At a time when we all collectively needed to actually DO something, about a very real problem.

I can only hope that, when WE have a serious need of help sometime in the future, the rest of the english speaking world does not choose to turn their collective backs on US!  

As for the idea of "Two-Tiered" health care from Paul Martin...

Do you realise that virtually ALL of the rest of the world's modern societies have now chosen to embrace some form of "Two-Tiered" health care? Even socialist Sweden has adopted this model! It is the only system that actually WORKS!

England, the Netherlands, most of Scandinavia, Italy, Belgium, Germany is rapidly coming onstream...pretty much ALL of the formerly "socialist" western nations are now adopting the reality of two-tiered health care and are rapidly abandoning the former influence of socialism/ Labour Unions. (Japan and France and a few others haven't quite figured it all out yet. They will. WE will, as well.) 

The old ways just didn't work. Time for something NEW.

Stephen Harper isn't promoting anything that is unproven. He wants to make our Health Care System into a _SUSTAINABLE_ system. One that will LAST for generations, without massive debt or massive lineups for rapidly diminishing procedures and services.

Paul Martin and his corrupt Federal Liberals want to continue the present unsustainable system. MUCH easier to skim money from a badly managed and failing system than it is from a well-run one. The Federal Liberals have NO plan to radically reform the current Canadian Health Care System.

It wouldn't be in their best interest to do so. Not at ALL.

Dontcha think?

But wait...oddly enough...no less a Liberal luminary than Paul Martin hisself has recently indicated that he is willing to look at a "fundamental change" in Canadian health care, and how it's financed.

Care to speculate what THAT might mean?
















And care to speculate what a "Libertal Vote" might mean to our collective health care system, sometime down the road? Given what has been happening in the rest of the world, lately?

Time for a little dose of reality, my friends.

Take it now, or take it later. It's coming...sure as hell... no matter WHAT you do, or HOW you vote.

Trust me on this.

[ March 31, 2004, 01:13 AM: Message edited by: macnutt ]


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

How about this scenario?

An NDP minority government with the Liberals as the junior partners. OK, I know, it's unlikely.

I just don't see a majority of sensible Canadians going over to the ultra-conservative option, simply to punish the Liberals for their bad behaivour and effectively punishing themselves and the whole country by electing the Northern Republicans. It's like jumping over one stinking dogpile to land right in the middle of another. So if Layton develops any momentum during the campaign, maybe folks will see that as an option.

A good chunk of the Liberal vote has always been those who would probably support the NDP, voting stategically, to ensure that the ultra-righties don't form government, anyway.

The fact is, the new Regressive Conservatives, don't automatically equal the totals for the Alliance plus the old PC's. With Harper as their leader they are still identified to Canadains as the Reform/Alliance. They're still carrying around their old contingent of racist/homophobic types, who they have to publicly flog now and again. The old PC vote will go mostly to Martin.

If the Conservatives could have put forward a leadership canditate with more of a centrist appeal, then I think they may have had a shot at it, the two who ran against Harper were not very credible. The only time that the PC's ever formed government, in recent decades, is when they were able to somehow convince Canadians in general, as well as the folks who now vote Bloc in Quebec, that they weren't really as right wing as they thought. Same way Gordo got in here in BC, btw. 

Funny how conservative governments like Gordo, Bush and Mulroney, wearing their so-called fiscal conservatism like a sheild, always seem to preside over, rising deficits, and increased taxes and service costs to everyone, except their wealthy buddies.

Canadians already know who Harper is, I don't see how he can really change his spots now. They'll probably gain some seats over their Alliance totals, because of the Liberal's corruption, but not enough to overtake them.


----------



## LGBaker (Apr 15, 2002)

macnutt wrote: 


> Care to speculate what would have happened if the Soviets had won the Cold War, instead of losing it, and were now in charge of EVERYTHING?
> 
> What if THEY were the dominant force on the planet right now? Instead of the USA?


Ah...gravity, centripetal and centrifugal forces, diurnal rotation, precession of the polar axis, global heat transfer, insolation, hurricanes, tidal waves, earthquakes, continental subsidence, peace, love,....to mention a few.

Let us be humbler.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Why not just go back to the Yucatan and see how everything goes if the asteroid misses.
















Here ya go lots of reading

http://www.google.com/search?q=alternate+histories+soviets+win&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

I'll bet there's even a comic book about it.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

*Hundreds of millions of tax dollars are missing, according to the Auditor General.*

So then, why can't you find any links to back yourself up?

At globeandmail.com searching "missing tax dollars" or even "missing tax" brings up nothing. Searching "auditor general" brings up stories about how Canadas security spending may not be adequate, or at least ill spent given the lack of proper organization.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Macnutts on "holiday" so he's got a reasonable excuse for not backing up his Chretien criminal allegations (which are quite funny - for April Fools Day).

But no one stepped in to challenge Macnutt on his claim of the inevitability of two-tier healthcare. I can't believe this! Quite apart from the fact that two-tier healthcare doesn't work to "save" money (the US and British systems are in far deeper financial trouble than our own), would Canadians really forego equality of health for the sake of not raising taxes?

Equal access to healthcare is such a fundamental principle that no matter what the scale of the challenges, it has to be upheld. Very little else matters compared to that freedom. Or are we about to consign 8 million elderly canadians to the scrapheap?

[ April 01, 2004, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: used to be jwoodget ]


----------



## canuck1975 (Dec 7, 2003)

> I just don't see a majority of sensible Canadians going over to the ultra-conservative option, simply to punish the Liberals for their bad behaivour and effectively punishing themselves and the whole country by electing the Northern Republicans.


Um, so can you explain how PC Party won the Ontario election in 1995, rather than the Liberals, when the NDP was decimated?


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

> Um, so can you explain how PC Party won the Ontario election in 1995, rather than the Liberals, when the NDP was decimated?


Nope. I haven't lived in Ontario for a long time, so I wasn't really following the rise and fall of the "Common Cents Revolution".

If I was to guess, I would say that it was similar to how Gordon Campbell's BC "Liberals" did it (not actually liberals or affiliated with the federal Liberal Party, but a takeover of the BC Liberal party by the decimated remnants of the right-wing Social Credit Party). They took advantage after the NDP self-destructed, helped by a media-fuelled scandal that ensnared Glen Clark, who was later found innocent in court. They came across with a fairly centrist message during the election that didn't scare too many of the swing voters. They managed to get 59% of the popular vote, which under a first-past-the-post electoral system, translated into a massive landslide capturing 97% of the seats.

I don't think that Harper and the Reform/Alliance remnants can change their image quickly enough to appear to be a centrist alternative and not scare the hell out of the majority of Canadians. But I could be wrong, the media might be interested in helping them perpetuate some sort of myth like that.

It was the same in the US, with Bush's "Compassionate Conservatism" and then the unveiling of his real agenda, once in office. Well, except that he didn't actually win that election.


----------



## canuck1975 (Dec 7, 2003)

So, essentially, it could happen federally too, with the Conservatives taking advantage of a Liberal party that's in disarray and fraught with in-fighting.

Isn't it historically the Tories who should be so public with their distaste of their leaders? hehe


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

> So, essentially, it could happen federally too, with the Conservatives taking advantage of a Liberal party that's in disarray and fraught with in-fighting.


Could happen, but I wouldn't bet on Harper and his boys being able to capture enough of the centrist vote to be able to take advantage of it. He's out of touch with most Canadians, he wanted Canada to go into Iraq, guns blazing, even though a vast majority wanted nothing to do with it. He and most of his boys want to stand "shoulder to shoulder" with Bush's America, even though most Canadians would rather stay the hell away from that version of the US. A Maclean's poll in January says that only 15% of Canadians would vote for Bush, if it was possible. Seattle PI article 

So if he and his party can shed their Reform/Alliance image, they might stand a chance. I gather that was what the whole takeover of the PC's was about and if they'd elected a leader who could appeal to the centre swing vote, they might have shed that image.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

I still maintain that this next Federal Election will...like many other Canadian elections..be all about punishing the current rulers for their distasteful behavior. (in this case, their outright theft)

Who we end up with will be a side issue for most voters.


----------

