Can Canada Survive?

The Philosopher
#1
This is not a ideological battle between left and right, nor a party battle between Liberal and Conservative. It is about the survival of Canada's political system. This minority system has made me more so afraid than in the past.

There are four official Canadian parties, Bloc, Liberal, NDP, and Conservative. Liberal support is increasing and is flooding into the NDP (due to scandals). Conservative and Bloc are sustained in their regions but lowering in areas the NDP may be capable of picking up. Even the Green Party is picking up on support.

If the once dominant support of the Liberal Party splits any further no one will be capable of forming a government. The once strong Conservative support in Quebec died when the Bloc showed up.

In the future I cannot foresee the Bloc losing Quebec. I can also not see the Praries being lost from the Conservatives. Nor do I see the NDP losing their hold on BC. The Liberals and Conservatives split Atlantic Canada. Ontario is split between the three non-separatist parties. The places that the Liberals have the Liberals will probably keep. There are some that are close but that just means that the person leading the minority government may change.

Unless something changes in the next year or so we may be in this stalemate for a while. The Liberals need to go down, the Conservatives need to go down, or the Bloc need to go down to make some fundamental change in the dynamics of our stability.

The only solution I see is:
Liberals are announced as a guilty party in the sponsorship inquiry and having to pay back a lot of money cannot run a proper campaign.

This is an open discussion on potential solutions to the problem of minority governments. Are we forever left to form "coalition partners" in government?
 
Derry McKinney
#2
The solution is proportional representation, Philosopher. The reality of our present system is that it works best when there is a minority government that works with other parties. The problem with that is instability of the government.

Proportional representation solves that by putting us into a permanent minority government. That gives all Canadians a voice proportional to the platform they voted for and forces the parties to cooperate and compromise.

Set election dates, or election calls that are decided by more than political expediency, are part of most PR propositions and would solve the problem of instability.
 
ottawabill
#3
My god I agree with you...wow!!! First past the post is a dumb system, but moreover we are further from a democratic system then many places. We are to vote for a representative but end up voting for a party leader. The representitives must vote with the leader and not his riding..we get screwed!!!! The party in power can appoint anyone to any posistion with little to no opposistion. We don't vote for the senate or the federal court system. We have elections when the PMO says so...this is top down government..comes from the British "we are Lords and we know best" system
 
Derry McKinney
#4
I wouldn't be electing a senate anytime soon. We've seen how ineffective and expensive that is with the US Senate. Unlike most of the NDP, I wouldn't abolish the Senate though. I would have the provinces put forth candidates and all of parliament (in a PR system) vote for them in a secret ballot.

With judges, I would continue to have them appointed...albeit by parliament, not the PM. The elected part of the US system is so politicized that judgements often depend on campaign donations that rulings become a joke.

The US system of appointing judges (Supreme Court etc.), a system that Harper is oh so enamoured with, has less to do with the rule of law or democratic principles than trying to take away women's abortion rights.
 
mrmom2
#5
I've got to agree with you there Derry electing judges does nothing but add more coruption to an over corupt system already
 
The Philosopher
#6
The problem with electing judges has always been that judges will win a popularity contest by promising certain changes... that a judge really should not make. But also like a politician in order to stay in power the judge has to act in a certain way.
 
Toro
#7
Sure the system can survive. Why not? The British Parliamentary system has been around for hundreds of years. Surely it can survive a small schism in some outpost of the Empire, can it not? There have been several parties that have come and gone - Social Credit, United Farmers, Progressives, CCF, Reform, Alliance, Natural Law Party (hahaha), etc.

People think that this schism is permanent. That is incorrect. Right now, there are only one and a half viable parties, the Liberals and the Tories. The Tories are hobbled. They can conceivably win a majority government if they elect 70 members from Ontario, but even if they do, it will be a narrow majority. But the odds of that happening aren't good. The Liberal upside is a big majority. The Tory upside is, realistically, a minority. That means, on average, the Liberals are likely to remain in power. But that's untenable as Canadians don't like like living in a one party state. They want at a least a national alternative so they can kick out the National Governing Party and let it lick its wounds from whatever transgression that has befallen it.

If you look at the big Tory majorities of the past - McDonald, Diefenbaker, Mulroney - they all had one thing in common - big wins in Quebec. The Tories have only been able to prosper winning the soft nationalist vote in Quebec, which is currently residing in the BQ. But it used to reside in Social Credit as well (though not to the same extent.) The Tories will eventually win the soft nationalist vote again IF Quebec remains in Canada. That may be 20 years from now, but it will happen. The BQ is an accident of history, borne out of frustration of the failure of Meech Lake. If Quebec decides to remain in Canada, then the Bloc will eventually disintegrate. Quebec voters are too smart to be left on the margins forever. And ironically, the disintegration of the Bloc will probably occur after the Liberals crush the BQ in some future election. But that's only if Quebec remains in the country.

The merger of the Alliance and the PCs is the beginning of the realignment of the old Tory coalition. Most people saw the merger as a takeover by the old Reform Party. I think that is wrong. The people running the party may have Reform Party roots, but essentially, the Conservative Party is the platform by which the old Tory coalition will realign. As much as I'd like to see Harper PM, its unlikely to happen. He will probably fail. Then, the Tories will elect someone from the East to lead them and make the party more palatable to voters in Central Canada - McKay, Bernard Lord, Mario Dumont perhaps.

The Liberals will go on being the Liberals. They will continue to form government most in Canada for at least the next few decades. That might change later in the century as the population continues to shift westward.

It will be interesting to watch what happens to the left. In reality, what happens to the left isn't that relevant from a Parliamentary standpoint. After all, its only 20 or so seats. But the next schism may occur there. I like Jack Layton. The NDP made a good choice, I think, electing him. However, except for the hardcore, the NDP is a bit of an anachronism, nationally anyways. Its too tied to the unions, and its been singing basically the same song since the 1960s. Maybe Layton can change that, I don't know. But its amazing to me that the NDP were completely shut out of Saskatchewan, its spiritual birthplace. Though it is likely to continue being the dominant force on the Left, the NDP should really watch the rise of the Greens. The Greens are young, they're new, they're hip, they're international. The NDP seems old and stodgy compared to the new, hip Green Party. It is the Greens who could do serious damage to the NDP. In some recent polls, they've been in double-digits. It could get fascinating over the next few years.

So, yes, of course the Parliamentary system can survive. Plus, simply having proportional representation doesn't solve the problem of perpetual minorities. Its more likely to exacerbate it.
 
shamus11
#8



The Next Liberal Majority

By

James Bredin


They always give away billions just before an election,
To ensure the Maritimes have no trouble in their selection,
Thatís how Liberals beg and buy and bribe their way to power,
And cover their tracks with Adscam cash at sixty miles an hour.

Or up the equalization here and there where they need votes,
They never said equalization was equal in their promotes,
Then blatantly buy Belinda with a cabinet post,
Put parliament into recess because they have the most.

Their culture of secrecy helps them to hide their corruption,
Always hidden in the Access Act without interruption,
Appoint their proper friends to all the appropriate places,
Without questions or answers and itís all in our faces.

Shenanigans that allow them firewall protection,
Where nothing is seen or heard Ė especially the connection,
And the Adscam kickbacks they received; itís just a bunch of lies,
Just jealous rogue types who would never look you in the eyes.

The Liberals are going to unite us in their corruption,
That upcoming Quebec referendum will cause no disruption,
You just canít speak French so you will never understand
Itís instant translations but no referendums so donít demand.

Tuesday, May 31, 2005



http://jimbredin.blogspot.com/
 
Derry McKinney
#9
Wow, that's the most bizarre and inaccurate read of the Canadian political scene I've seen yet. It's further out than the people who are predicting Harper will win a majority government. I actually shared a joint with a drug-addled street person who had a better guess than that once...his prediction was that the BQ would win the next election and declare all of Canada part of France.


Quote:

People think that this schism is permanent.

Which people?

Quote:

That is incorrect.

No it isn't. The schism (rhymes with jism) is permanent. There will be a shift that corrects for it at some point, but building a bridge over a gaping hole (I knew a g...nevermind it's a whole other thread) doesn't get rid of the gaping hole.



Quote:

Right now, there are only one and a half viable parties, the Liberals and the Tories.

Not accurate at all. First of all there are no tories, that party is gone. Second of all, the CPC is not a viable party because they cannot garner credible support in Ontario. They are a 3 month miscarried fetus shriveling under the harsh light of the real world. Third of all, calling the Liberals viable is like claiming that smoking is good for you...the claim has no credibility, but the lack of credibility doesn't mean you'll quit.



Quote:

The Tories are hobbled.

Only if "hobbled" means cutting off the horse's legs above the knees.

Quote:

They can conceivably win a majority government if they elect 70 members from Ontario, but even if they do, it will be a narrow majority.

What was that thing that guy at Woodstock said? Oh yeah, "Don't eat the Brown Acid." The CPC will never elect 70 in Ontario. Their numbers there are dropping like rock every time Harper or one of his ites speaks in public.

Quote:

But the odds of that happening aren't good.

Roughly the same as me deciding to buy a suit and become a banker.

Quote:

The Liberal upside is a big majority.

PPPffftt. Nobody wants to vote for them. They've been around for twelve years and their latest leader doesn't even talk funny. They will lose even more seats in Quebec. They will likely lose a couple (although not as many as the CPC) to the NDP. They will lose a few more than that to the CPC.

Quote:

The Tory upside is, realistically, a minority.

The way their numbers have been dropping, they'll be lucky to remain official opposition.

Quote:

That means, on average, the Liberals are likely to remain in power.

In Canada? No!!!! What a brave prediction. I predict the sun will not explode tomorrow.

Quote:

But that's untenable as Canadians don't like like living in a one party state.

Actually, Canadians don't give a flying f*ck. They've pretty much given up on having a leader again, and one corporate hack looks pretty much like the other.

Quote:

They want at a least a national alternative so they can kick out the National Governing Party and let it lick its wounds from whatever transgression that has befallen it.

No, they want a saviour. They want another Trudeau...not necessarily his policies, but the excitement he brought.

Quote:

If you look at the big Tory majorities of the past - McDonald, Diefenbaker, Mulroney - they all had one thing in common - big wins in Quebec.

That ain't gonna happen again. Not with these nutbag hillbillies showing up now.



Quote:

The Tories have only been able to prosper winning the soft nationalist vote in Quebec, which is currently residing in the BQ.

It won't go Conservative anytime soon. It has a better chance of going NDP. Even for that to happen it would require Gilles being caught in bed with the proverbial dead girl or live boy, and I doubt even that would shake things much.

Quote:

The Tories will eventually win the soft nationalist vote again IF Quebec remains in Canada.

What did that guy say at Woodstock?

Quote:

That may be 20 years from now, but it will happen.

Not a hope in hell. According to all of the polls on all of the issues this country is moving to the left. This is not a political pendulum swing I'm talking about, but rather basic attitudes. Under those circumstances the Liberals would have to shift drastically to the left, farther than the Liberals are now, to mount a valid charge.

If the CPC is going to win government at all, it will be in the near future, before attitudes can shift further.

Quote:

The BQ is an accident of history, borne out of frustration of the failure of Meech Lake. If Quebec decides to remain in Canada, then the Bloc will eventually disintegrate. Quebec voters are too smart to be left on the margins forever. And ironically, the disintegration of the Bloc will probably occur after the Liberals crush the BQ in some future election. But that's only if Quebec remains in the country.

The BQ is a political reality borne out of left of centre 3rd party politics and a policy vacuum created by the Mulroney government. They aren't gong anywhere anytime soon.



Quote:

The merger of the Alliance and the PCs is the beginning of the realignment of the old Tory coalition. Most people saw the merger as a takeover by the old Reform Party. I think that is wrong. The people running the party may have Reform Party roots, but essentially, the Conservative Party is the platform by which the old Tory coalition will realign. As much as I'd like to see Harper PM, its unlikely to happen.

The merger was unsuccessful. It was an attempted takeover, but all the moderate voices are gone from the party. Allthat's left is extremists from the radical right...neocon goofballs too stupid too lay down when they're dead.

Harper and his ites wil never be in charge because they are creepy little freaks who want to tell us who we sleep with, but are afraid to tell tell their corporate masters to piss off.

Quote:

Then, the Tories will elect someone from the East to lead them and make the party more palatable to voters in Central Canada - McKay, Bernard Lord, Mario Dumont perhaps.

Doubtful. The extremists in the party will not tolerate moderate voices, nevermind putting them in charge. Go read the boards where the Reform/Alliance/Conservatives post. There will be no moderate leaders.

Quote:

The Liberals will go on being the Liberals. They will continue to form government most in Canada for at least the next few decades. That might change later in the century as the population continues to shift westward.

As populations rise and diversify they shift to the left. You can go back as far as Rome on that one.

Quote:

It will be interesting to watch what happens to the left.

We're going to grow out hair long and revive the BT Express song "Peacepipe" as our anthem.

Quote:

In reality, what happens to the left isn't that relevant from a Parliamentary standpoint.

What did that guy at Woodstock say?

Quote:

After all, its only 20 or so seats.

Smart money says 30, then 50-70 the time after. that's in a fragmented parliament.

Quote:

But the next schism may occur there. I like Jack Layton.

I'm sure he likes you to, but he's married.

Quote:

However, except for the hardcore, the NDP is a bit of an anachronism, nationally anyways.

You're just saying that because of the poll that said Jack would give back you're wallet.

Quote:

Its too tied to the unions, and its been singing basically the same song since the 1960s.

As opposed to the greed, graft and kickbacks song that the Conservatives and Liberals have been singing since the 1860s?

Quote:

But its amazing to me that the NDP were completely shut out of Saskatchewan, its spiritual birthplace.

Apparently you only count seats and do no real analysis.

Quote:

Though it is likely to continue being the dominant force on the Left, the NDP should really watch the rise of the Greens. The Greens are young, they're new, they're hip, they're international. The NDP seems old and stodgy compared to the new, hip Green Party. It is the Greens who could do serious damage to the NDP. In some recent polls, they've been in double-digits. It could get fascinating over the next few years.

The Greens in Canada are really a red tory party, and even that is giving them too much credit. They are corporatists first and environmentalists second. They are now losing supporters to the NDP and picking up up disafected Conservatives and Liberals. The continued myth that they are part of the left is not fooling anybody on the left anymore, and is increasingly ineffective with even right of centre voters.

Quote:

So, yes, of course the Parliamentary system can survive. Plus, simply having proportional representation doesn't solve the problem of perpetual minorities. Its more likely to exacerbate it.

Perpetual minorites aren't a problem, they are a blessing.
 
no1important
#10
Nothing wrong with constant miniorities, it keeps the government on its toes and allows other parties a better chance to implement some of their platforms, like what is going on now with NDP. Nothing wrong with that.

People want the government to govern and not play games like Harper. There are more than a few people who voted Liberal that would vote NDP if it wasn't for the fact they were "forced" to vote Liberal to keep Harper out. So I do not think with the Liberals including some of the NDP platform/policies in the current Liberal budget is a big deal to most people.

btw- Right wing-ism (if thats a word or not) support has been falling in Canada for quite some time, even in Alberta. The population on average is moving left and further left than anytime before. Unless something absolutely catastrophic occurs (and evidently Gomery wasn't one) the Conservatives will never form government in Canada again, with their current "hard right wing attitude". They need to change from the top down. Their worst recent mistake was choosing Harper over Stronach.
 
ottawabill
#11
you only like minorities so the NDP can have a say. If it were the otherway around and Conservative policies were being pushed through with only a handful of conservatives in the house you'd be screaming blue..err Orange murder... Listen I don't like Stephen Harper, but they are all playing political games. The problem in minorities is you spend more time protecting you position than governing...I fear with Stephen at the head of the conervatives the next election will have the same results as this one except with more Bloc members, less liberals and the same Ndp count. If people don't vote for your party don't blame other's....It's because the NDP never act like a party looking for power. They are alway nagging the power's that be without much leadership themselves.

Before you jump all over me I would say the same with the conservatives..The liberals have shown themselves to be slime and all I here from the Tories is " They are slime"..I know that!! I want to know what someone else is going to do.....

Why oh Why has our last person in power with leadership been Trudeau..os that the best we can do??
 
Jay
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by no1important

Nothing wrong with constant miniorities,

Quote: Originally Posted by no1important

People want the government to govern and not play games

I see these two statements as contradictory.

I don't want stalemates in government I want leadership. I want things to get done.

Quote: Originally Posted by no1important

and allows other parties a better chance to implement some of their platforms, like what is going on now with NDP. Nothing wrong with that.

If you think there is nothing wrong with buying the whole NDP vote in parliament by the Liberals, then I suppose soÖ.
 
Toro
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Wow, that's the most bizarre and inaccurate read of the Canadian political scene I've seen yet.

Here, I fixed if for you...

Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Wow, I'm about to give you the most bizarre and inaccurate read of the Canadian political scene I've seen yet.

...because he comes up with

Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Smart money says 30, then 50-70 the time after. that's in a fragmented parliament.

in response to

Quote: Originally Posted by Toro

After all, [the NDP has] only 20 or so seats.

Warren Buffett once said that there is a fool in every market. If you don't know who the fool is, its you. If you are the, ahem, "smart money," I'd put whatever amount you want straight up on the NDP not winning 50 seats in either this or the next election.
 
Derry McKinney
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by Lawn mower Man

Here, I fixed if for you...

It wasn't broken. What are you really trying to fix and who are you a fixer for?

Quote:

Warren Buffett once said that there is a fool in every market.

Warren Buffett always was a moron.

Quote:

If you are the, ahem, "smart money," I'd put whatever amount you want straight up on the NDP not winning 50 seats in either this or the next election.

That's because you are basing your political analysis on the way chicken entrails fall instead of long term trends and polling. I doubt you've even looked at riding results from the last election, what the spreads were, what the voting histories are, or the factors affecting those ridings specifically.

Quote: Originally Posted by jay

I don't want stalemates in government I want leadership. I want things to get done.

Then why are you supporting a party that refuses to do any real work?

Quote:

If you think there is nothing wrong with buying the whole NDP vote in parliament by the Liberals, then I suppose soÖ.

If you believe that, then you shoud have listened to that man at Woodstock, Jay. The NDP budget bill (C-4 is very popular with Canadians first of all. Second of all, this kind of public deal making (not the kind of backroom deal that Stevie tried to buy Chuck with) is exactly how government should work, with voices being heard and proposals being put forth.

You should also explain how it is okay for Stephen Harper to offer a sasfe seat and campaign money to Chuck Cadman for his vote.




Quote: Originally Posted by bill

you only like minorities so the NDP can have a say.

Yes. All Canadians deserve to be represented in Parliament.

Quote:

If it were the otherway around and Conservative policies were being pushed through with only a handful of conservatives in the house you'd be screaming blue..err Orange murder.

NDP policies aren't exaxctly being pushed through the House. In fact the CPC is again being obstructionist by holding up the budget bills in committee.

Quote:

The problem in minorities is you spend more time protecting you position than governing.

That's not a problem, it's a bonus.

Quote:

I fear with Stephen at the head of the conervatives the next election will have the same results as this one except with more Bloc members, less liberals and the same Ndp count.

Indications are that if an election were held right now the CPC would lose seats, the NDP would make gains and the Liberals would remain the same.

Quote:

If people don't vote for your party don't blame other's....It's because the NDP never act like a party looking for power. They are alway nagging the power's that be without much leadership themselves.

Apparently you haven't being paying attention to to what has been going on in this country or to the polls.
 
Toro
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Quote: Originally Posted by Lawn mower Man

Here, I fixed if for you...

It wasn't broken. What are you really trying to fix and who are you a fixer for?

The CIA. I mean, who else right?

Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Quote:

Warren Buffett once said that there is a fool in every market.

Warren Buffett always was a moron.

Oh now I get it. You're really a brilliant humourist, playing a role. Like Andy Kaufman! Its a pleasure to meet you Mr. Kaufman. I've always been a fan.
 
Derry McKinney
#16
Grow up, Lawn Mower Man. I doubt the CIA would take anybody as inept as you. You stink like a neocon shill though...right down to the talking points and misinformation.
 
mrmom2
#17
I knew I smelled bull**** in this thread it just kind of oozed out :P
 
Toro
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Grow up, Lawn Mower Man. I doubt the CIA would take anybody as inept as you. You stink like a neocon shill though...right down to the talking points and misinformation.

Where's the customary "Bush supporter!" shrill?
 
I think not
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro

Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Grow up, Lawn Mower Man. I doubt the CIA would take anybody as inept as you. You stink like a neocon shill though...right down to the talking points and misinformation.

Where's the customary "Bush supporter!" shrill?

Join the club Toro, you're not the only one being accused of it.
 
Toro
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by I think not

Quote: Originally Posted by Toro

Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Grow up, Lawn Mower Man. I doubt the CIA would take anybody as inept as you. You stink like a neocon shill though...right down to the talking points and misinformation.

Where's the customary "Bush supporter!" shrill?

Join the club Toro, you're not the only one being accused of it.

They probably don't even know what a neocon is. Sure sounds cool though.
 
I think not
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro

Quote: Originally Posted by I think not

Quote: Originally Posted by Toro

Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Grow up, Lawn Mower Man. I doubt the CIA would take anybody as inept as you. You stink like a neocon shill though...right down to the talking points and misinformation.

Where's the customary "Bush supporter!" shrill?

Join the club Toro, you're not the only one being accused of it.

They probably don't even know what a neocon is. Sure sounds cool though.

Yes, but the amusing thing about this is I don't even like Bush, nor have I ever voted republican, EVER!
 
Derry McKinney
#22
Quote:

They probably don't even know what a neocon is. Sure sounds cool though.

What an arrogant little twerp you are. I know what an neo-con is. I know all about Leo Strauss and his followers. I know about the Chicago school and its off-shoot the Calgary school. I know that most of the world calls the insane economic theories that you guys follow neo-liberalism. Did you know that one of the foremost scholars on Straussian politics in the world is a prof at the University of Regina?


So far in this thread you've managed to show that you know nothing of Canadian politics. In other threads you've demonstrated ignorance of other kinds.

Your cheerleader here, Mr. Can't Think, spends most of his time screaming, "anti-American," every time somebody dares to point out the policies of your country in a negative light. Why don't you join him in his off-key, tone-deaf chorus? Oh wait, you already have.
 
I think not
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Mr. Can't Think, spends most of his time screaming, "anti-American," every time somebody dares to point out the policies of your country in a negative light. Why don't you join him in his off-key, tone-deaf chorus? Oh wait, you already have.

I have an idea, show me a post for anything positive you have said about the US, ANYTHING, on ANY topic and then I'll agree with you I'm Mr Can't Think.
 
Derry McKinney
#24
Someplace or other I mentioned liking Marlboros. Guess it's time to change your name.
 
I think not
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

Someplace or other I mentioned liking Marlboros. Guess it's time to change your name.

Case and point, you're a model anti-American. Hence a bigot. And the worst kind to boot. You get paid for it.
 
Derry McKinney
#26
I'm just a goat farmer from Saskatchewan, Never Think. I get paid by the kilogram...hair or meat.

Your sensitivity about your country, likely because of its indefensible criminal acts, is kind of sad. You do have Marlboros though.
 
I think not
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by Derry McKinney

I'm just a goat farmer from Saskatchewan, Never Think. I get paid by the kilogram...hair or meat.

Cut the crap Rev, I got barked at from Peapod claiming you know your **** because you do research for a living.

Your sensitivity about your country, likely because of its indefensible criminal acts, is kind of sad. You do have Marlboros though.

Alot of it is indefensible, I have said that repeatedly, but thats not enough for you. I have to trash everything that comes out of the US, only THAT is good enough for you. Well too bad you have to wake up and see us on every corner. Better luck in your next lifetime. In the meantime, please continue to engage in your self-promoting blather.

 
KariLynne
#28
What is it exactly that everyone finds so scary about Steven Harper? Is it because he wants smaller government? Is it because he wants you to keep more of your money and pay less taxes? Is it because he thinks parents should be given tax credits for you to decide the best options for your child care (including stay at home parents)? Is it because he thinks Canada is actually a democracy? Please someone enlighten me!
 
peapod
#29
You know what...never mind...this is all to familar

Read the thread, you should be able to see why we do not want steven harper running the government.
 
Vanni Fucci
Free Thinker
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by KariLynne

What is it exactly that everyone finds so scary about Steven Harper? Is it because he wants smaller government? Is it because he wants you to keep more of your money and pay less taxes? Is it because he thinks parents should be given tax credits for you to decide the best options for your child care (including stay at home parents)? Is it because he thinks Canada is actually a democracy? Please someone enlighten me!

It's because he and his caucus are bigots and zealots, and would legislate away the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...

It's because he opposes the Kyoto Accord, and denies the effects of global warming, or that global warming is caused by greenhouse gas emissions produced by his corporate sponsors...

It's because he would gladly cut taxes to corporations and the richest segments of our society at the expense of social programs...

It's because he is for deep integration with the US, which, under the current administration is just frightening...

It's because he would scrap the Canada Health Act in favour of privatizating healthcare after the US model...

It's because his party, while they try to maintain a facade of incorruptability, is starting to show that they are just as prone to corruption as any other...

It's because he has rightly taken the name of Dithers from Paul Martin...
 

Similar Threads

25
Will Bing.Com Survive
by Liberalman | Jul 31st, 2009
12
Will I Survive In Alberta?
by pinkpaws10 | Jan 20th, 2009
106
Could Canada survive.....
by scratch | Oct 23rd, 2008
0
Oh No Not I, I Will Survive
by I think not | Nov 25th, 2006
no new posts