# and Harper wants an election !!!!



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Bruce Carson was named this week as the first executive director of the new Alberta-based Canada School of Energy and the Environment.
> 
> The institute recently got $15 million from the Tory government.
> 
> ...


TheStar.com | Canada | Liberals slam Harper aide's plum appointment

The "I am Conservative" gent has a point.....big time.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

The "I am Conservative" gent is likely already registered with the Green Party of Canada.

All political parties are composed of sleazebags. While I find that appointment a really bad idea, what rules does it violate? I'm not saying there aren't any violations, but merely saying "conflict of interest" doesn't cut it as a rule.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

As much as I hate to admit it, Harper would probably win a slim majority. His biggest asset is; Mr. Dion. NEP 2 will cost him every seat west of Ontario and I suspect a few Maritime seats as well. Anyone in Ontario or Quebec that actually looks at the impact of such lunacy on low or fixed income Canadians will also have to vote anti-Liberal as well.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Bring on an election any time. The Liberals will find themselves right back where they are now if they dare to try with Dion at the helm.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

SINC said:


> Bring on an election any time. The Liberals will find themselves right back where they are now if they dare to try with Dion at the helm.


I imagine the Liberal Party is also well aware of this by now. The Party will want to push him to the wolves sooner than later so that they can try to rebuild again. At this point, the Liberals don't have much to loose by having an election. 

But, it will take more than the Liberals to bring the Conservatives down. Maybe Harper will do it himself, but the polls aren't spectacular, nor is the economy, nor is their much budget to toss around.

The NDP stands to loose because they completely missed the boat on environmental issues. I think they will loose support to the Liberals and Greens. 

I haven't been following Quebec issues closely so I don't know if the Bloc stands to gain or loose. 

So, it probably comes down to both the Liberals and Conservatives wanting an election.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

This just goes to show that King Harpo is sleazy, but perhaps less sleazy than Mulroney...

Dion is the least of the problems of the Fiberal Party. That party ejected much of their support the day the Imperious Martin stole power away from the elected leadership, then brought in some of the sleeziest creeps. It's certainly something when a character like Mulroney can call the rabble that followed Herr Martin around as scumbags.

Martin was thoroughly corrupt - and yet, no one has bothered to ask him what happened to the $32 million he raised to run against Sheila Copps (who raised a mere $120,000). Nor does it address the real mess of a situation that they had in Hamilton East, where Valeri won the nomination over Copps by a margin of 5000 votes - 5000 votes being greater than the number of actual members of the Fiberal Party in that riding. This kind of contemptuous behaviour just lead a great number of Fiberals over to the NDP, where Valeri was basically destroyed in the Election in what has been a pretty safe riding for the Fiberals for at least thirty years.

The Fiberal "rebuild" is more than just replacing Dion with another figurehead, but ejecting all of the criminous scum from the party - anyone attached to high crimes like the billions that disappeared in "advertising" in Quebec, anyone attached to rigged or gerrymandered nominations, false notions of promoting "women" by suspending civil liberties and democratic means. A new generation of those untainted by these crimes needs to step forward - something that swapping Dion for some other contemptious "leader" will not accomplish.

Until then, Layton can squeeze the Fiberals on the left, while King Harpo can dominate the center of the body politic...


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

EvanPitts said:


> ...
> The Fiberal "rebuild" is more than just replacing Dion with another figurehead, but ejecting all of the criminous scum from the party - anyone attached to high crimes like the billions that disappeared in "advertising" in Quebec, anyone attached to rigged or gerrymandered nominations, false notions of promoting "women" by suspending civil liberties and democratic means. A new generation of those untainted by these crimes needs to step forward - something that swapping Dion for some other contemptious "leader" will not accomplish....


So who would not be dumped?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> So who would not be dumped?


The Fiberal's need to get rid of the whole lot, and start fresh. All of their old timers are corrupt, and have been ever since St. Laurent hijacked the party leadership. The Fiberal's became entirely addicted to the abuse of power during the Pipeline debate, and have never ceased for a moment.

Listing the corrupt Fiberal's would probably break this server; even just listing the corrupt Fiberal's from The Hammer would stress out the pointers on the message database.

Of course, there is a parallel, seeing that the Liberals in Great Britain destroyed themselves in the 20's, and have not since been able to rally - after having had a long series of governments throughout the 19th century (punctuated by a number of Conservative minorities). They just couldn't survive without Gladstone...


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> *Cry us a river, Tories, but who wrote the book on chaos?*
> 
> 
> If it were elementary school, the teacher would tell the Conservatives to go stand in the corner
> ...


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

payback




> *McGuinty vows to be vocal in next federal vote*
> 
> HARPER STOKES ELECTION SPECULATION
> Aug 19, 2008 07:34 PM
> ...


with neither Quebec nor Ontario just where does Harper intend to scrounge votes???



> New poll puts federal Liberals ahead in Ontario, Quebec
> Aug 14, 2008 04:30 AM
> 
> OTTAWA–A new poll suggests there could be trouble ahead for Stephen
> ...


Save the country the money of a needless and meaningless election- dissolve Parliament - let the Libs and NDP and Bloc try and govern as other nations do - in a coalition- maybe they've learned something......but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

oh god that would really, really **** off the conservatives...

the howls. The nashing of teeth. It'd almost, be worth it.

almost.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> The "I am Conservative" gent is likely already registered with the Green Party of Canada.
> 
> All political parties are composed of sleazebags. While I find that appointment a really bad idea, what rules does it violate? I'm not saying there aren't any violations, but merely saying "conflict of interest" doesn't cut it as a rule.


Yes, but the conservatives were elected to a slim minority based on promising better. Accountability, honesty, remember?

So you are admitting then that conservatives are no better than the liberals?

Glad you finally woke up.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I'd be content to toss the lot of them


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> So you are admitting then that conservatives are no better than the liberals?


I admit that all political machines, once they reach a certain size, become corrupt. Once in awhile, one party or another makes a few steps in the right direction. Currently, I prefer the Conservative over the Liberals but really have no respect for any of them.



> McGuinty vows to be vocal in next federal vote


This is a threat? The effete mewlings of one of the most ineffectual premieres in recent history.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

MF: Shocking. This is the second time in recent memory that you've used the term "effete." I'm going to have to warn you to cool it now, lest you skirt the very real risk of becoming, in your jaunty vocabularic perambulations, the very embodiment of "effete."

McGuinty vowing to be anything but routinely lame is unremarkable.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max, I think "effete and mewling" is the perfect description of "Dalt the Dud" McGuinty.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> I admit that all political machines, once they reach a certain size, become corrupt. Once in awhile, one party or another makes a few steps in the right direction. Currently, I prefer the Conservative over the Liberals but really have no respect for any of them.


I am glad to see you figure this out. That's not what your 'tune' was some time ago.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Apparently, it's also the key to "successive majority governments." Enjoy.




kps said:


> Max, I think "effete and mewling" is the perfect description of "Dalt the Dud" McGuinty.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

provincially it's the same thing. no great leaders in either of the parties. John Tory is an even bigger snore.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

HowEver said:


> Apparently, it's also the key to "successive majority governments." Enjoy.


LOL, something from Machiavelli comes to mind.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

I have maintained for years that we need a "None of the above option". If nothing else it would prevent damage during the 6 weeks it would take the various parties to come up with a new field of candidates.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Kps: agreed.

However: agreed also.

Such is life... the middle way rules.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

Hear hear!! 
I drives me wild looking at the terrible choices we have. LIberals as proven sleaze bags...Harper coming up fast on the inside in the sleazebag sweepstakes.


MacDoc said:


> I'd be content to toss the lot of them


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

HowEver said:


> Apparently, it's also the key to "successive majority governments." Enjoy.


Ernie Eaves and John Tory are the keys to these governments.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

During the years since the Liberals imploded, all the other parties have had an unprecedented opportunity to show leadership and grow their support. The only one to have done anything substantive with this opportunity is the Green Party, which has gone from decidedly fringe to having double digit support*.

The Conservatives, more than any of the others, have had an absolutely golden opportunity to showcase their 'bold, honest and sound' leadership. But we've seen nothing but "sneaky, gutless and callous" from them. The NDP, who have had my support for decades, have shown themselves to be completely without integrity and, even worse, without any remotely credible alternatives. And the Bloc, it goes without saying, are non-starters for any patriotic Canadian, within or outside of Quebec.

What this demonstrates to me is that, far from the 'best and brightest', the vast majority of Canada's politicians are nothing but bumbling fools that would be better employed shoveling dung than charting Canada's future. I think the core problem here is that, like the US, we've made public life *too* public, such that intelligent people eschew the opportunities of politics, leaving that sector populated by attention-seeking mental defectives desperate to become celebrities.

Cheers

*note: as much as the support for the Greens has grown, it's still unlikely that they'll win any seats, let alone enough to for an official party, because their support is so evenly spread across the country. I think the Greens would benefit from proportional representation more than any other party.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Polls say Canadians don't want an election but the dufus collective in Ottawa don't want to listen....what else is new 
Harper seems to want to run away from the election spending probe....good enough reason to spend money on an unnecessary election....



> EDITORIAL
> *A carbon election that clears the air*
> 
> Aug 21, 2008 04:30 AM
> ...


open and transparent....yeah sure 



> *Tories pushing fall election to shut down probe, MPs say*
> 
> CAMPBELL CLARK
> From Thursday's Globe and Mail
> ...


globeandmail.com: Tories pushing fall election to shut down probe, MPs say


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

An election will change nothing, although it might just scuttle Dion's leadership role. (Or more correctly, his non leadership role.)


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

SINC said:


> An election will change nothing, although it might just scuttle Dion's leadership role. (Or more correctly, his non leadership role.)


No doubt, I think they'll drop him quickly after another defeat. Thing is the Liberal have already showed they aren't confident in any of their candidates, or else they would have elected someone other than Dion in the first place. A new leadership race will only be a rehash of the previous one.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

double post


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Ernie Eaves and John Tory are the keys to these governments.


Yeah, the authors of "How To Loose An Election For Dummies".

Eves at least looked like someone that emulated some competence, and did get the province through the power outage; while Tory fell off the bus on the first day. I mean, it's not like these guys lost to someone talented, or with a brain or anything. McGuilty proved that one can make a comprehensive list of 250 "promises", ie. lies, so long as he satisfies Mayor McStallion.

King Harpo does make his points - everyone knows Chretien made 18 visits to China in order to get a free trip, and make important contacts at the golf ball factories. I for one would rather our Head of Government be doing some work than fooling around at the faux opening ceremonies of the Olymbics. They could just send our GG over there, as she is not up to anything, and as a bonus, she could also represent France and Haiti as citizens.

Harpo would really have to put a pretty big Mulroneyesque effort in order to catch up to the corruption and patronage of Chretien - and these three clowns are entirely out of the game when it comes to the collossal corruption and vote rigging that Mr. Martin was involved in during his term of disgrace...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Currently, I prefer the Conservative over the Liberals but really have no respect for any of them.


That's not saying too much, considering that in comparison to the Liberals, most people would prefer one of the following: the Greens, NDP, Marxist Lenists, Marijuana Party, Rhinoceros, the Republicans, Hamas, the Democrats, the Colorado Party, the Communists, the African National Congress, Hezbollah, or any party from Poland, Hungary, Mongolia, Zambia, Equatorial Guinea, etc... 



> This is a threat? The effete mewlings of one of the most ineffectual premieres in recent history.


You could remove the "one of" and "recent", and change "premiers" to singular. He has managed to do less than the administration of Harry Nixon...


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I'd find this worthy of day time soap opera if we weren't paying these clowns to supposedly govern 



> *Harper's rift with Mulroney could haunt the Tories in Quebec*
> 
> LAWRENCE MARTIN
> From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
> ...


globeandmail.com: Harper's rift with Mulroney could haunt the Tories in Quebec


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Seems that Martin Lawrence has a hard on for the Conservatives, you seem to be quoting him a lot. We may want to look into this fixation you both have.

What happened to him anyway, he used to write some funny material? I guess you can only dress up in fat suits so many times before your career goes down hill, just ask Eddie Murphy.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Jumbo: I have no idea what Doc's all grumpy about this time. Just some ramblings of attributed to an ex-PM. Why is he posting this at length?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

macdoc yer upsetting the sheep.

Post only happy things. Happy Harper. Good Harper. That sort of thing.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

groovetube said:


> macdoc yer upsetting the sheep.
> 
> Post only happy things. Happy Harper. Good Harper. That sort of thing.


I would settle for something I don't have to scroll through, like every other normal poster on here. But of course that would require original material, something someone might be lacking.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

yea but then ya'll will whine there's nothing to back it up.

No pleasin Harper kissers is there.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

groovetube said:


> yea but then ya'll will whine there's nothing to back it up.
> 
> No pleasin Harper kissers is there.


A preemptive shh eh? Really? Like anyone would question parliament is full of retarded children. Even if someone did a link would work just as well. No I thinks it's more an ego thing.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

an ego thing? Posting news articles?

come on. The pair of you are always tag teaming after any anti harper stuff gets posted and tap dancin on the tables when the liberals are bashed in just about every thread.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

screen envy  ...seems Harper lap puppies need it in their face.....a relief from the Sun pablum they seem addicted to.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Most hopelessly deluded Liberals quote long drawn out bits of views that fit their own. 

Funny they haven't run outta that kinda stuff yet, given the sorry state of the Dion party.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

it makes no difference how sorry a state the liberals are in. That is simply not an excuse for the fumbling, the outright lies and deceit Harper's government have engaged in.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Didn't all of Mulroney's Quebec buddies either jump to the Bloc (or to the Fiberals, in the case of Charest), or are currently in jail / under investigation / have warrants for their arrest / waiting for their court date / or are too old and senile to testify?

Plus, how many of those dudes are going to bother ditching their easy jobs at Oerlikon and AirBus, where they sip wine and taste bob bons to return to Canada? And even the ones that didn't skip off to Europe, how many of them can be flushed out of their comfy offices on Bay Street in order to mingle with the Quebecois electorate?

The only person in this country that was less popular than Mulroney was Kim Campbell, especially after she went to town on the homeless in Vancouver...

The Heinz-Schrieber Affair is a circus sideshow that in sum total, is somewhat less than the Chretien Golf Ball Affair - at least Mulroney was scamming money from the Bavarian Socialists, and not from the Canadian Taxpayer. Chretien was smart though, he made sure he got the mad RCMP dude out there blowing pepper spray into the crowds of protesters so no one really bothered checking out the golf balls too closely.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

The ONE area of priority in the military that really makes sense long term and Harper fumbles it and has no room to maneuver with a deficit looming....



> *Tories scuttle plans to overhaul Maritime defences*
> 
> 
> STEVEN CHASE
> ...


globeandmail.com: Tories scuttle plans to overhaul Maritime defences

Brilliant management....not..


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Green party. This little dual monarchy has got to come to an end. They can do whatever they want as they know the other will do the same in a couple years and they will get back in again.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sounds like the ship quotes were too high. You'd have blasted them if they paid too much as well.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

never fails.

like clockwork


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Yep, just about time for a groovetube, non-post.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Less words - less filling!


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Macfury said:


> Sounds like the ship quotes were too high. You'd have blasted them if they paid too much as well.


I'm sure the Liberals could have found a firm in Quebec to make us some phantom boats. But I think we all would have died from shock if they actually put money into the Canadian military.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

Quotes too high? Possibly-but the fact that BOTH quotes were too high suggests that perhaps the budget established was unrealistic. Also, how did they choose who was on the RFP list?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

mc3251 said:


> Quotes too high? Possibly-but the fact that BOTH quotes were too high suggests that perhaps the budget established was unrealistic. Also, how did they choose who was on the RFP list?


The same process as usual: graft and corruption followed by payola, coverups, cash back schemes, and "cabinet discussions" (ie. how can we buy votes), all coated in rich, luxurious layers of influence peddling, lobbying, and free steak dinners, followed by a dessert parfait of "you can not obtain that classified document under the Freedom Of information Act".


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

EvanPitts said:


> The same process as usual: graft and corruption followed by payola, coverups, cash back schemes, and "cabinet discussions" (ie. how can we buy votes), all coated in rich, luxurious layers of influence peddling, lobbying, and free steak dinners, followed by a dessert parfait of "you can not obtain that classified document under the Freedom Of information Act".


 Your confidence in our government leaves me all dewey eyed.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

mc3251 said:


> Your confidence in our government leaves me all dewey eyed.


Dewey eyed eh? 

Did you mean dewy-eyed: moist with, affected by, or suggestive of dew <dewy grass>"?

Or Dewey eyed?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

mc3251 said:


> Your confidence in our government leaves me all dewey eyed.


The government is pretty consistent, considering that MacDonald set up this whole process before he was caught with his hands in the cookie jar during the Pacific Scandal. It also helps being from The Hammer where the same process is not scandalous at all, it is just business as usual...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

SINC said:


> Dewey eyed eh?


Or perhaps the other Dewey?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Canadians don't want an election.....but Harpo knows best .....next......please....

and the Globe takes a rightfully dim view - especially of the process.



> GLOBE EDITORIAL
> 
> *Face the Commons before an election*
> 
> ...


globeandmail.com: Face the Commons before an election












> *Harper government whips Tories into line with secret handbook*
> 
> Don Martin
> Calgary Herald
> ...


Harper government whips Tories into line with secret handbook


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

It's not secret if everyone knows about it. And really what is politics without strategy? Oh yes the Liberal handbook "How to look stupid at the taxpayers expense." Thankfully the "Green Shaft" was proposed while not in power, so we wont have to pay for it after the next election, and Dion gets fed to the wolves.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Can't find it on the net but one Lethbridge Herald cartoon pictured Harper and Dion in a fishing boat arguing over who would call the election. 

Loved the title; *"The Call Of The Loons"*


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

Dewey eyed eh? 

Did you mean dewy-eyed: moist with, affected by, or suggestive of dew <dewy grass>"?

Or Dewey eyed? 
You know, I looked at the spelling of that and thought, the hell with it. Shoulda known I'd get nailed I


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

mc3251 said:


> You know, I looked at the spelling of that and thought, the hell with it. Shoulda known I'd get nailed I


Yeah, but it was all in good fun!


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

Of course....I wouldn't have survived this life without a sense of humour.
take care
michael


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Harper predicts minority
> 
> REUTERS
> 
> ...


Then why doesn't he abide by his own law and wait until Oct 2009 instead of wasting money on an election Canadians do not want.... what an ass. 

When are these collective idjits going to learn to govern in a coalition as many other nations do.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> Then why doesn't he abide by his own law and wait until Oct 2009 instead of wasting money on an election Canadians do not want.... what an ass.


Does the statement, *"because the law was designed to limit the term of majority governments"* shine any light on your understanding? 

And it isn't "his" law, it's a law passed by the parliament of Canada, just to be totally clear.

I didn't realize you were speaking for all Canadians, but you obviously don't as I for one welcome an election, as do other Canadians I know who would like to see a majority government this time around. 

Speaking of asses.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

There was an election called? That's news to me.  Until there is one called, quit your whining.

And who cares if it's another minority gov't, at least we would be rid of each party trying to make the other flinch for a couple more years. 

I bet if they elect to wait until Oct 2009 you would still be calling him an ass. I would have thought you would be jumping at the chance to get rid of Harper, yet you want him in power for another year. What's wrong MD, confidence in Neon Dion a little low? :lmao:


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

I think this minority stuff is garbage. Canadians are clearly tired of these majorities where they ram all kinds of legislation that leads to class warfare and discrimination. With a minority, we only get those laws that are actually needed, without the graft, corruption and apartheid style racial policies that is normally rammed through the process during majorities.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> What's wrong MD, confidence in Neon Dion a little low?


You joining Harper in the same category???....inability to understand English seems to run in the right wing lap puppy strain as much as in the Cons themselves. Something in the water ...or the feed perhaps.

*I have said continually for about 2 years now I want all parties to work as a coalition and learn to govern that way.*

I don't give a rat's ass about your "assumptions otherwise 

Just search on "none of the above" 

Just cuz you got your nose stuck deep into Harper's nether parts doesn't mean others follow any single party with blind "faith".


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Spoken like a true Liberal!


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

spoken by Canadians in the last election apparently. Likely will say the same damn thing this time around too. Do you think Harper will get that Canadians haven't given him the full mandate he's desperate for?


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Ya and I would like a pot of gold at the end of every rainbow but wake up and smell the horsesh!t, that will never happen. So it's back to picking your pile like the rest of us. 

Or you can be flakey and have dreams of hugs and handshakes between parties, because that really is going somewhere. 

Me I go with who hasn't "f'ed" me lately, and from the looks of it Dion would like to "f" me some more, just like his buddies previously in power, no thanks.


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

groovetube said:


> Do you think Harper will get that Canadians haven't given him the full mandate he's desperate for?


Doesn't matter. This seems quite plausible.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Yeah, I read that today too, Doug. Good read and hardly a dubious scenario.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Brilliant, I love it. They deserve nothing less.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

spoken like a true conservative.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Nah - don''t confuse Harper's brand of neo-Con crap with small c conservatism.

Give me a Danny Williams any day over the current Cons in Ottawa. You can see the Harper lap puppies here for what they are.....bitter dyspeptic "past best by" date.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Ohhh, Dannnyy Boy-y-y-y-y!


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Personally, I've been happy with the way things have been going. Nobody getting anything done. No major dislocations. A minority government is relatively harmless when the parties don't get along. Heaven help us if they agree on something.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Of course, should the Liberal party as we currently know it fall to dust, the conservatives will be obliged to invent a new boogeyman. This too shall come to pass.

_The pipes, the pipes..._


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Well, there's always the real boogey man--you know, the guy living under your bed.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

_Pshaw._

I contend that, should your cherished fibberals finally fail you, you will then be obliged to instinctively create a coveted new target... call them the neo-liberals. You will be able to rail at them to your last breath.

_Think of the slogans!_


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> You can see the Harper *lap puppies* here for what they are.....bitter dyspeptic "past best by" date.


The most over used and meaningless political term used on ehMac for months now.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

It's not enough to say "lap dog," evidently. MacDoc is taking it to CAT-5!


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Nah GTs heart is in a good place :clap: - he just does small c conservatives a disservice associating them with the clowns in the current Cons.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

MacDoc said:


> Just cuz you got your nose stuck deep into Harper's nether parts doesn't mean others follow any single party with blind "faith".


Nice...


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

yea I missed that too.

Sums up a few.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Will the PM get away with his risky election gambit? Probably
> Article Comments (346)
> LAWRENCE MARTIN
> From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
> ...


globeandmail.com: Will the PM get away with his risky election gambit? Probably

Hmmm I recall a few leaders called an election later that no one wanted.....

Bob Rae woke up as premiere much to his surprise with a shocked David Peterson sidelined and Paul Martin ended in a minority gov much to HIS chagrin.

Now that Harper has thoroughly pissed off Ontario and echoes of all that went wrong with Harris and Walkerton, election fraud on spending amongst other numerous scandals on the boil....one wonders what Harper will wake up to.......


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

"And, they say, he wants to get the vote out of the way before Julie Couillard releases her tell-all book on Oct. 14, which promises more juicy details about her biker gang past and how her former relationship with Maxime Bernier ended in his resignation as foreign affairs minister."

heh, now there's a book launch date that might be moved up lol.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Say what you want about Harper, MacDoc, but his strategic thinking far outpaces the short-term ideas you're quoting from your favourite newspapers. The scandals you're dreaming about are barely registering on the publc psyche. I don't care for another election, but I do believe that Harper knows exactly what he's doing--just look at the way that he's flummoxed Dion so far.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

My problem is that I can't stand any of them. My revulsion is non partisan. I will acknowledge that Harper is a very clever political strategist, but I'm not sure that translates into good leader or good prime minister (which I believe is the point). On the election call, while technically he may be within his rights, it is totally disingenuous of him to use the law in this way-as the hue and cry shows.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ma3251: The idea that any of them give a rat's"tail" for their constituents is only true in the most patronizing of manners. The more successful of them promote the illusion the best.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

Strategic? As in finding new ways to solve problems and prosper in the long term, with regard for longer term impacts and benefits? 

I know, let's exploit the Arctic natural resources!! No one EVER thought of that before. It will be highly strategic to keep Canada in the business of supplying raw materials to the rest of the world, and then buying back the products at a profit.

This isn't strategic, this is same old, same old planet poisoning.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mc3251 said:


> Strategic? As in finding new ways to solve problems and prosper in the long term, with regard for longer term impacts and benefits?


No. Strategic as in making sure they extend their own party's power base.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

MacDoc said:


> Nah - don''t confuse Harper's brand of neo-Con crap with small c conservatism.


It would even be better if people didn't confuse Harper with neo-Con anything - he is as Liberal as any Fiberal, and does not believe in anything that could represent a Conservative value. He is pro crime, pro molesters, pro effete, pro racism, pro liberality, pro apartheid, and anti winning any kind of war. But then again, Canada hasn't had a Conservative of any sort since Meighen, and even that is questionable.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

No. Strategic as in making sure they extend their own party's power base. 
Right, and after all that is what I want my prime minister's main focus to be.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Personally, I've been happy with the way things have been going. Nobody getting anything done. No major dislocations. A minority government is relatively harmless when the parties don't get along. Heaven help us if they agree on something.


I agree. The country even "feels" different these days, what, without being constantly assaulted with scandals and acts of class and race warfare that we have been subjected to for the past fifty years of Balkanization. People are not as angry these days, not as roiled up. Sure, there are complaints, but no one is complaining about the fact that some racist legislation was clobbered in process because of the Minority.

It is simply a good situation. Those things that need to be done get done, because everyone agrees that they need to be done. And those things that are more sketchy are negotiated out, so everyone has a say. We can be a little tougher on crime but at the same time, keep the parole and reoffender industry in business, not to mention the AlarmForce.

It also helps when it comes to things like Afghanistan, because sure, Harper can pledge things to the Americans all he wants, but if he decided not to follow through, he can pin it on Dion, or that rascal Duceppe, who control the balance of power.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mc3251 said:


> Right, and after all that is what I want my prime minister's main focus to be.


That's what ALL of their focuses are. Saw Chretien interviewed by "Strombo" the other day and he said exactly that. Politics is simply about getting power and keeping it.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

and this is going to play really well.... 



> Ottawa wanted U.S. to accept more lenient meat inspection regime
> 
> BILL CURRY
> From Friday's Globe and Mail
> ...


globeandmail.com: Ottawa wanted U.S. to accept more lenient meat inspection regime


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

Macfury said:


> That's what ALL of their focuses are. Saw Chretien interviewed by "Strombo" the other day and he said exactly that. Politics is simply about getting power and keeping it.


Yes I agree with you completely. You can see it in electing and governing cycles, in the way that behaviour changes. And practically speaking if they don't stay in power then they can't really do much, can they?
Still, and perhaps I'm an idealist, I want our political leaders to have a long term vision for Canada that is believably sustainable, that respects future generations, and that maintains and/or creates the kind of society that we can all believe in and contribute to.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mc3251: The problem is that, given the power to access virtually unlimited funds, the power they gain to to do "great things" blinds them. Years ago, when serving in government was considered an honoour, the amount of power invested in it was minimal compared to today. Now it's like getting a plum job in a fatcat corporation and the benefits of remaining there immediately blind them to whatever they hoped to achieve. There may be one year in a four-year period when a party can actually focus on some sort of agenda. The rest is posturing and preparing for the next election.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

'bout right 










shades of Bush


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Last poll I saw as to who Canadians think would make the best PM had Dion running in third place behind Layton who had about half the support of the leader and current PM. Tells me the Conservatives might just get that majority if leadership quality thoughts enter the polling booth with voters.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

SINC said:


> ...Tells me the Conservatives might just get that majority if leadership quality thoughts enter the polling booth with voters.


There is a line between leadership and dictatorship. The latter is a majority in parliament. I am entirely in favour of minority governments, it is the only way to keep the politicians even remotely interested in doing a good job.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

TheStar.com | Canada | PM key to Tory election strategy



> PM key to Tory election strategy
> 
> Public's perception of him as decisive leader could lead to majority government: Pollster
> 
> ...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Thanks Macfury. I rest my case.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

I see Stevie is already campaigning based on his leadership abilities even though he has not yet called an election. 

Let's ignore the fact that campaigning before the election is called reflects a lack of leadership skill. Calling oneself a good leader is like claiming to be a good Christian. In either case if the claim were true it would not need to be made at all. The fact that the claim is made probably means the statement is false.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Unless King Harpo folds during the campaign, which I would not expect, or some kind of scandal comes forth - I think Dion will be turfed. It is entirely possible that the Fiberal Party will in fact, fall apart from all of the internal factionalism. I think they doomed themselves when they added Bob Rae to their roster. The Fiberals thrived on special interest groups, and will now die because of those same groups.


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

Word elsewhere is that, after an early meeting with Dion, Adolph will drop the other shoe this morning.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

There is always a chance, slim that it may be, that our resident alien at Rideau Hall will refuse the election call - since in reality, there has been no motion of non-confidence in the House, nor has the government been enfeebled or rendered ineffective in any way.

Sure, King Harpo hasn't been able to cram every piece of hate legislation and act of lass warfare through Parliament - but isn't that actually a good thing? Harpo can govern the way Canadians want him to govern, with a minority so he can't get away with all of the garbage that every previous majority has gotten away with over the years. If an election comes to fruition, he deserves to face the exact same house as he faced prior to dissolution.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

eMacMan said:


> I see Stevie is already campaigning based on his leadership abilities even though he has not yet called an election.
> 
> Let's ignore the fact that campaigning before the election is called reflects a lack of leadership skill. Calling oneself a good leader is like claiming to be a good Christian. In either case if the claim were true it would not need to be made at all. The fact that the claim is made probably means the statement is false.


Actually if he really possessed those leadership skills he would have no difficulty working with a minority for another year, at which time he could legally call an election.beejacon 

Hey he's the one that got that law passed to begin with.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Solberg retiring from politics
> Article Comments (42)
> STEVEN CHASE
> Globe and Mail Update
> ...


globeandmail.com: Solberg retiring from politics

3 ministers gone....hmmm 

seems even a few conservative heavies are opting for "none of the the above" ticket.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

In any election, some candidates will retire rather than run again. I think you're reading too much into this.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

wow 3 prolific cabinet ministers in one go.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> wow 3 prolific cabinet ministers in one go.


Prolific are they?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

sure. With the screeching and howls of victory I witnessed at Emerson's defection you'd have thought he was Jesus's son.

Suddenly they're not prolific?

Anyway. If it was just one, no biggie. But 3, with only 2 1/2 years in.


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

Three back-benchers .... meh.

Three Cabinet Ministers .... non-meh.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

Macfury said:


> In any election, some candidates will retire rather than run again. I think you're reading too much into this.


I agree with MacFury.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Front page on the Star....










but of course MF knows better


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MacDoc said:


> Front page on the Star....but of course MF knows better


No, I agree with the headline. Three ministers will definitely not run.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I concur. Looks like they won't run. 

We really should look up some Liberal ministers who didn't run in previous elections MF, but hell, that would be as meaningless as these guys in terms of an election outcome, and therefore as big a waste of time, wouldn't it?


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

MacDoc said:


> Front page on the Star....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would take anything you read in the Toronto Star with a grain of salt. Same thing for the Toronto Sun. They are both very low-level papers with significant political bias. Yes, it is true that they aren't running; why the hell is this front-page news? 

Try reading the Globe and Mail, The National Post, or even the New York Times. They are *often* less sensationalist.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

the globeandmail.com had it as their lead storey.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

groovetube said:


> the globeandmail.com had it as their lead storey.


You're kidding? That's quite unlike them...


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

i read it every morning. Definitely not out of the ordinary for them.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

I think the only people who really want an election are the media.

A federal election campaign generates copious amounts of 'news-worthy' content without any requirement for fact-checking, investigation, or even much analysis... it's just what a budget-conscious editor wants.

Cheers


----------



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

"I think the only people who really want an election are the media." I would say that Harper must want an election, or he would wait until Oct. of next year as the law states.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

bryanc said:


> I think the only people who really want an election are the media.
> 
> A federal election campaign generates copious amounts of 'news-worthy' content without any requirement for fact-checking, investigation, or even much analysis... it's just what a budget-conscious editor wants.
> 
> Cheers


Uh, uh, that's not the reason at all bryanc. 

You see, a federal election campaign generates copious amounts of money for advertising in the media. 

That budget conscious editor you think you know, will still have to fight for every thin dime management begrudgingly gives him to cover the news that is paying the freight, namely that election.

Been there, done that, many, many times over a 42 year career.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

bryanc said:


> I think the only people who really want an election are the media.
> 
> A federal election campaign generates copious amounts of 'news-worthy' content without any requirement for fact-checking, investigation, or even much analysis... it's just what a budget-conscious editor wants.
> 
> Cheers


Not to mention advertising revenue although an outlet could go bankrupt trying to collect from some of these deadbeats.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

The smug looks of Harper remind me soooo much of David Petersen calling an unwanted and unneeded election in Ontario.
We'll see how strategic voting plays out in Ontario and Quebec - my bet is there will be last minute surprises as has tended to be the case in previous election.

Danny Willliams I think is going to be a player in this and a vocal one against Harper and I think other premieres will have their impact.

Lots like me are pissed at the entire lot.......the best possible outcome would be just about an identical parliament and that would mean every single leader should be turfed and get in some east coast conservative and Ontario liberals and BC common sensers and get the parliament functional again and let the RR/NeoCon rump rage. Bloody ideologues....


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

As much as I embrace the province of Newfoundland, your repeated notion that Danny Williams will be some sort of kingmaker strikes me as ill-founded.


----------



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

"As much as I embrace the province of Newfoundland, your repeated notion that Danny Williams will be some sort of kingmaker strikes me as ill-founded." Macfury, I agree. Premier Williams actually sent an email to all of his PC caucus wanting to know if they supported his "ABC" (Anyone But Conservatives) idea. All but one replied "yes sir" and one person said that he/she would be neutral. I don't approve of him going across Canada with this view, especially since we, the taxpayers, will be footing this bill.

He had done well with helping to bring the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador (the official name of our province) to a "have" status from a "have not" status (next year we pay in to the equalization pool rather than drawing from this pool), but this ABC plan is beyond the scope of his being our premier. Granted, Harper lied to our province and was stupid enough to put it in writing and then break his promise. However, express your disapproval here in NL, and let the rest of Canada worry about their own promises that the Harper government has made/kept/broken. 

A side note -- there has not been a single person to come forward and say that they were going to run for the Conservatives in the two Tory seats that are being vacated by two retiring Conservative MPs. The other Conservative MP is going to run again and might end up our only Tory MP. We shall see.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

such progress...










••

Never implied kingmaker status just one more loud voice decrying Harper's attempted Bill Davis avuncular wannabe image..... a loud voice amongst many.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> such progress...
> 
> 
> ••
> ...


Indeed:

http://www.ehmac.ca/s-time-again-eh...canadians-believe-conservatives-will-win.html


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Well by claiming the law he wrote does not apply to him he got his election.

So we have: 

King Stevie who is campaigning on leadership and attack ads. A sure indicator that he is bereft of any good ideas.

Monsieur Stephane who wants to massacre those on fixed incomes with a carbon tax. If you don't speak French you have no chance of knowing what else he is saying.

Mr. Layton who would still be in grade 4 math class if they hadn't automatically passed him on.

Mr. Duceppe who above all else is a block head.

Ms. May who so terrifies the other four that they won't let her participate in the debates.

Surely we can do better than this bunch.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

The "law" he wrote doesn't have any real meaning, since it was not an amendement to the Constitution. Any substantive and fundamental change to the structure of the Government must be agreed to by at least 7 provinces representing at least 50% of the population. None of that was done, so his "law" is nothing more than a promissory note not worth the paper it is written on.

Attack ads are an integral part of the message, and always has been. The Romans engaged in all kinds of mud slinging, and outright bribery in their elections. Elections in the Holy Roman Empire were quite expensive, and the Election of Charles V cost him about 5 million Florins (which put him in to debt with a certain banker by the name of Fuggers). Before Canada adopted secret balloting, Elections could also be violent, and a "wrong" vote could get that elector tarred and feathered.

The Conservative attack ads are weak and effeminite - nothing like the ones put together by Chuck Schumer (who was pretty much the master of the negative message).

Dion will probably go down with his Carbon Tax ship, just like John Tory sunk his campaign when he decided to attack Catholics with his hatred. Dion is trying to look a little environmental, but it doesn't work.

Toronto's chrome-dome has uttered the same "I'm applying for his job" joke so many times, it's entirely lame. Note to Layton: "Last month called, they want their joke back".

Duceppe is scarier looking than the Ukranian dude that was only scary looking because the Russians put the dude on a diet of pure dioxins and other industrial waste. Really, can he even smile? He looks like he is trying to hold a loaf in until the end of the campaign...

May will get her chance, as the Green Party is continually building support across the country. Eventually, the back office boys will have to let her get in and play.

Better than this bunch? Hmmm... We haven't had anyone good run since, um, urr, maybe one of the elections when MacDonald was running.

I don't expect any entertainment value either. Debates have been a downer ever since Mulroney sliced Turner into bits...


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

SINC said:


> Indeed:
> 
> http://www.ehmac.ca/s-time-again-eh...canadians-believe-conservatives-will-win.html


But only 36% ± will vote for him.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

MannyP Design said:


> But only 36% ± will vote for him.


That 36% might be in single digits if there was a "None Of The Above" option.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Harper has really brought some real class to ads.

Stéphane Dion | Not a leader. | Not worth the risk. | notaleader.ca


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

groovetube said:


> Harper has really brought some real class to ads.
> 
> Stéphane Dion | Not a leader. | Not worth the risk. | notaleader.ca


It's fun making commercials. Some good Dion quotes in there.:lmao:


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

_Ugh._ Welcome to the New Crass Age... brought to you by the intertubes.

These certainly are mean-spirited times. Guess I better get with the program and find some ads that make fun of Harper's hair.... that should put me in the same foul trench.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

That website is pretty funny.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

wee gee ain't we shocked the tag team loves it.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

C'mon groovetube, Dion does cut a rather Chaplinesque figure!


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

I'll take Chaplin over Nero, anyday.


----------



## mbaldwin (Jan 20, 2003)

Macfury said:


> That website is pretty funny.


Very funny, but still infantile.

At least the tone was much more lighthearted than the ridiculous FUD campaign of The Dion Tax Trick | Stéphane Dion | willyoubetricked.ca


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

god that's some baaad flash.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)




----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)




----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

Sorry, but after careful review of my local candidates, I have been forced to switch from Green to Liberal.

Nothing to see here. Move along, please.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)




----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

http://www.cagle.com/working/080910/nease.jpg


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

^^^
Why so??? Did you find out that the Fiberal was consistent - consistent in lying, deceit, glad handling, and grabbing free steak dinners?


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

JumboJones said:


> http://www.cagle.com/working/080910/nease.jpg


<Snort!> If I drank coffee, I would have just blown a mouthful all over my monitor...


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Eww!



FeXL said:


> <Snort!> If I drank coffee, I would have just blown a mouthful all over my monitor...


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

If wishes were horses.....



> CBC Poll: 55% of Canadians Believe Conservatives Will Win
> SINC
> 
> Canadians Set To Vote Conservative: CBC News Poll ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... Last Page)
> ...


getting paid for your headline promotion there Sinc??

...latest from the champagne trail.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> If wishes were horses.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The headlines are not mine. They are from your highly touted CBC among others.

Getting nervous are you MD?

You should be.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

I wonder if Dion wants to tax the CO2 bubbles in champagne. Any idea MD?:lmao:


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

SINC said:


> The headlines are not mine. They are from your highly touted CBC among others.
> 
> Getting nervous are you MD?
> 
> You should be.


SINC: The stink of fear from Mississauga is palpable!

Better mark some of his predictions, SINC. Whatever happens, he will later say that it was just what he had wanted and predicted! 

*"'bout right!!"*


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

well I suppose if there's enough 'Dougies' there and not too many 'Zoeys' that eat organic food maybe they have a chance.

Hey 'Dougie'! Ol buddy ol pal! You don't want to get shafted now do ya?


noooooooo.....


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Sure  - the headlines were posted by you Sinc to promote the guy you used not to like,

There were lots of political threads to put the articles into - call it just as it is not with your NeoCon "spin" attached _"oh who moi??_" ...spare us.

But keep joculation foaming.....matches the party mouths.....puerile....about the same as their collective behaviour in parliament.

••••

I want them all gone as I've said ad nauseum - so **** off with the Mississauga claptrap - it'll vote Liberal anyways.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> Sure  - the headlines were posted by you Sinc to promote the guy you used not to like,
> 
> There were lots of political threads to put the articles into - call it just as it is not with your NeoCon "spin" attached _"oh who moi??_" ...spare us.


Obvious you're worried. Like I said the headlines come from YOUR impartial CBC.

Don'tcha hate it when that happens?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I think we all have something to worry about if any of them gets a majority.

Minority governments only. It's high time some understand 40% is not a majority to do whatever the hell you want.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

groovetube said:


> It's high time some understand 40% is not a majority to do whatever the hell you want.


Too bad your Liberals didn't take your advice their last time in power, or did that extra .085% over 40% give 'em carte blanche to do whatever the hell they wanted, which as I recall was steal a whole bunch of taxpayers dollars? (See percentages below.) 

Adscam or something rings a bell.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

SINC said:


> Too bad your Liberals didn't take your advice their last time in power, or did that extra .085% over 40% give 'em carte blanche to do whatever the hell they wanted, which as I recall was steal a whole bunch of taxpayers dollars?
> 
> Adscam or something rings a bell.


exactly my point Sinc. yer buddies are no better at all.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

groovetube said:


> exactly my point Sinc. yer buddies are no better at all.


Oh I think they are. Conservatives have never outright stolen taxpayer's money in an Adscam type fraud.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

that's where we'll disagree.

I have seen enough of the conservative 'tell us one thing do another', and there have been enough scandals in just a couple years in a small minority already.

They haven't even had a majority yet.

I think one is fooling oneself to think they're better.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

But it's still OK for Liberals to govern with a 40% vote, right?


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

It's called a minority. It works. Checks and balances.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

SINC said:


> But it's still OK for Liberals to govern with a 40% vote, right?


no Sinc. None of tem. I don't want any of them, including the liberals, to get a majority. Both of the big '2' need to learn a majority doesn't mean slam your agenda down everyone's throats. It's time for some cooperation and democracy. 

A majority for Harper, will not be democracy. But I'm glad you and a minority of Canadians, might be satisfied.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

A majority for the Liberals meant slamming their agenda down the country's throat--with just enough consideration for the next election. In Canada, 40% means the right to do exactly that. 

In the U.S., you need 50.1% for that.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

observant, you are.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

SINC said:


> Oh I think they are. Conservatives have never outright stolen taxpayer's money in an Adscam type fraud.


Nope: A politician is a politician. 

If they had an honest bone in their body they would find a different line of work. A majority simply corrupts them completely. Too bad Dion persists in the Carbon Tax madness as I believe this approach will assure a majority of the nations Cons will be sentenced to parliament. Given Harper's extremely close proximity to Bush's backside; this is not a good thing.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

I agree with Groovetube-a minority government is the thing to hope for, at least for me. I also think that it is tragic that we have to (quite rightfully) see politicians as slime, as fundamentally dishonest as a normal condition of their existence.
I find the conservative agenda scary, I'll admit, although the liberals are exactly where they deserve to be based on the last few years in power.
What the hell do you do?


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

mc3251 said:


> What the hell do you do?


Vote strategically. Give none of them a majority until Conservatives lift the veil and the Liberals find real leadership.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

groovetube said:


> A majority for Harper, will not be democracy. But I'm glad you and a minority of Canadians, might be satisfied.


Yes, it will be democracy. The will have been voted in via cast ballets. This is how a Parliamentary democracy works. It's the best of a lot of bad systems. 

Proportional Representation is a false panacea. It will only serve to transfer power to those who can deny power. It will only serve to transfer power to the extreme. The left wing thinks this is a great idea because they are currently the ones at the extreme and would likely win out with PR. But, let's not be so short-sighted since extremists exist on both sides of the spectrum. The example of the last 4 years of Canadian politics should be a lesson to that end. How many of the left truly thought the Conservatives would ravage the Liberals?


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Vandave said:


> How many of the left truly thought the Conservatives would ravage the Liberals?


38% in the polls constitutes ravaging? How very very hopeful of you.

Election 2008: At the End of Week 1, Tories Lead But No Magic Breakthrough

I don't think voters are as stupid as you expect them to be.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> Vote strategically. Give none of them a majority until Conservatives lift the veil and the Liberals find real leadership.


Hold on! They have to lift the veil AND the Liberals have to find a real leader--at the same time??


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Hold on! They have to lift the veil AND the Liberals have to find a real leader--at the same time??


No one will want the Conservatives once the veil is lifted.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> Vote strategically. Give none of them a majority until Conservatives lift the veil and the Liberals find real leadership.


exactly.

Although, I have thought that the only way to solve this gridlock in politics here, is if the conservatives to manage a slim majority, you just know they won't be ale to keep it in their pants if that happened. 4 years of hell, but it may change the other parties enough that that 4 years is all Canadians will be able to stomach.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)




----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Vandave said:


> Yes, it will be democracy. The will have been voted in via cast ballets. This is how a Parliamentary democracy works. It's the best of a lot of bad systems.


This is how parliamentary democracy based on first-past-the-post has failed. The only time FPTP works properly, meaning where a government gets a majority with an actual majority of the votes is when there are only 2 parties contesting for seats. Canada hasn't been in that situation for a very long time. 

Weilding veto-proof majority government power with anything less than representing the votes of 50% of the citizens is not democratic, it's just a failure of the system to work.

That's why most countries in the world improved on parliamentary democracy by going to proportional representation.



Vandave said:


> Proportional Representation is a false panacea. It will only serve to transfer power to those who can deny power. It will only serve to transfer power to the extreme. The left wing thinks this is a great idea because they are currently the ones at the extreme and would likely win out with PR. But, let's not be so short-sighted since extremists exist on both sides of the spectrum. The example of the last 4 years of Canadian politics should be a lesson to that end. How many of the left truly thought the Conservatives would ravage the Liberals?


You keep saying that, but that doesn't make it true. If that was the case the extremists would rule most of the world, because most of the world uses PR. The coalitions of parties that happen under PR systems actually work to cover the centre areas, not move to the extremes. This is what a party under our system must do to gain a majority also. The difference between the 2 examples is that the out-in-the-open coalitions that govern under PR systems have their platforms, compromises and deal-making in public view, often with written agreements. The coalitions that happen within a party to share power are invisible to the public. Within the Con party we have no idea what role or what power the social cons hold vs. the fiscal cons vs. the rump of old Red Tories. Within the former Chretien Libs, which were also a coalition between fiscal con Bay St. Libs and a few more lefty-style Trudeau libs, the machinations between those groups was held behind closed doors.

When you vote in a majority government under FPTP you are voting for a pig in a poke. You don't know who really holds power within the ranks of that party and you don't know what direction they will ultimately take, election promises notwithstanding.

We are now facing a situation where a party that could get the votes of 40-odd percent of the citizens will be able to shut out the votes of the other 60-odd percent for up to 5 years. Depending on the how the vote-splits go we could see that 40-odd percent equal a landslide in the House. This ain't democracy just because we've always done it that way. 

We used to prevent women and minorities from voting and called that democracy too, with no other excuse than "we've always done it that way."


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I thought it was democracy when the Liberals held a majority government withless than 50 per cent of the vote, but Gratuitous will point to all of his posts complaining about the situation at that time.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Macfury said:


> I thought it was democracy when the Liberals held a majority government withless than 50 per cent of the vote, but Gratuitous will point to all of his posts complaining about the situation at that time.


Actaully MF, it's something I have complained about and I took common cause with many conservatives and Conservatives who were complaining about FPTP at the time. During the Lib majority under Chretien, I didn't think much of their government at all. I still don't, I think they did a bad job because they didn't have to take in to account the views of others. The Liberals have historically been the most hostile party in Canada to the idea of PR. That said I'd rather have that than a Harper majority, given the upcoming FPTP choice.

But this is not about my party of preference, this is about democratic principals. I do not favour the idea of a party without 50% +1 of the votes get a majority power veto in Parliament, whether that party be the NDP, as we saw in BC in the '90s or the Libs or Cons nationally.

I believe in a government that most truly reflects the wishes of the majority of Canadians and that encourages consensus and compromise between parties. Fake Parliamentary majorities don't do that.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Macfury said:


> I thought it was democracy when the Liberals held a majority government withless than 50 per cent of the vote, but Gratuitous will point to all of his posts complaining about the situation at that time.


Actually took a look at some of my oldest posts on the subject. I wasn't on ehMac during much of Chretien's time, but I did find this post (http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else-eh/20559-shame-liberal-government-2.html#post148466 ) that expresses my view of the Liberals in regards to proportional rep. I also in another part of the thread share my disgust at Chretien, who I've always thought was a clever Machiavellian slimeball.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

OK, Sauce--I gambled on that one and lost! To be honest, I only thought I had a 60/40 chance anyway. You're not a bad egg for a left-libertarian.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Macfury said:


> You're not a bad egg for a left-libertarian.


Thanks for that. Once the Revolution is victorious, I'll be sure to use my influence within the Party to avoid having you sent to the re-education camps.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

When my forces are victorious, I will cancel the social programs you most benefit from...last.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> I thought it was democracy when the Liberals held a majority government withless than 50 per cent of the vote, but Gratuitous will point to all of his posts complaining about the situation at that time.


at some point in the thread you'll figure it out.

You're almost there lol.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)




----------

