Why Change the Federal Government?

Durgan

Durgan
Oct 19, 2005
248
0
16
Brantford, ON
www.durgan.org
The economy is sound.

The Liberals did a good job of cleaning house.

They will be so transparently honest for a few years that the Civil Service will be almost useless due to over hamstringing with checks and balances.

There are no pressing issues that need addressing.

I say there is no reason to replace the Liberals. All the parties should commit themselves to working in a minority situation.

Having one more election if the next minority government fails for
no viable reason invites disaster for the instigator.

Durgan.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
The economy is sound.

True.

Don't know for how long, the way the Liberals are throwing away money.

The Liberals did a good job of cleaning house.

They will be so transparently honest for a few years that the Civil Service will be almost useless due to over hamstringing with checks and balances.

You've got to be kidding. Dingwall is just waiting until the election is over to get his "entitlements". Shapiro, the ethics counsellor, is under a cloud. The TSE went nuts for two days on trusts before Goodale publicized his policy on them (can you say "insider trading") Pelletier is back on his old job. Martin refuses to reveal which Liberal MPs in Quebec received illegal election funds in the Adscam mess (you think he doesn't know???)$40 million are still missing. And the Liberals have not changed their behaviour one iota. You must have missed them travelling across the country with a train load of cash, shovelling it out at every stop. Except to foreign aid, where they promised it.


And....there were rules during adscam. Remember Fraser? "They broke every rule in the book." It doesn't matter how many rules there are if the gov't is willing to break them.

There are no pressing issues that need addressing.

Ohmigod! Parliamentary reform. Senate reform. Rebuilding the military. Sensible child care legislation. I could go on and on.

I say there is no reason to replace the Liberals.

I say there is at least 1000 reasons to dump them.

I say there is no reason not to dump the lying, crooked bastards.

Having one more election if the next minority government fails for
no viable reason invites disaster for the instigator.

Well, we'll agree first and last.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
I'm not sure that the Liberals will be "transparently honest", but I will predict that the Harperites will be almost as bad, if not equal....it will just be a different crowd of hangers on who benefits.

To all of those who worship at the altar of the cleanliness of the Conservative Party, I suggest you look at the people involved. People like Peter Mackay....remember Elmer Mackay? Remember that Mulroney guy? Same crowd. Same crowd. You think they're going to be squeaky clean?
 

Durgan

Durgan
Oct 19, 2005
248
0
16
Brantford, ON
www.durgan.org
Quote Parliamentary reform. Senate reform. Rebuilding the military. Sensible child care legislation. Unquote

Parliamentary reform- I suppose this means proportional representation. It was rejected in BC and yesterday PEI. Canadian's don't want it?

Senate reform- a non-issue. The Senate has no real power and shouldn't have any. How they are selected really doesn't matter. The ruling party likes to keep the present system as a place to reward their court jesters. All parties like this system in practice.

The Military is a bottomless pit for money. They tend to spend friviously, old technologically backward British Junk, but there is no doubt those in the line should be amongst the best equipped in the world. Probably a capital budget around 7 billion per years would be reasonable. I don't think this will go over well with the tax-payer.
It's Tommy this and Tommy that, throw him out the brute; but it's Tommy Saviour of our Country, when the guns begin to shoot. Kipling, but still relevant.

Sensible Child-care- You want little Johnny- you look after him. The state doesn't breed him, why should it look after him? A form of assistance is great, but the prime responsibity is the breeding pair.

Durgan.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Why Change the Federa

Never mind Elmer, although the apple sure doesn't fall far from the tree.

Look at what MacKay did to Orchard...signed a written agreement an then turned around and stabbed Orchard in the back. Now Davey-boy likes to stand up in front of crowds and prattle on about ethics.

Look at Harper himself. He headed the NCC...a groupd that won't say how much money it makes or how much of its time it spends lobbying because it doesn't want to admit to being a lobbying group. How the hell is Harper going to fix that kind of problem?
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Durgan said:
Colpy said:
I say there is at least 1000 reasons to dump them.

That is the negative view. The SDP (Sea-Doo Party) is not going to slip into power on negatives.

Now let's see the reasons for voting for the SDP party? I have no interest in platitudes, specifics only.

Durgan.

Reasons to vote for the Sea Doo Party? You mean before voting for the Banano Family Party or the Groucho Marxist Party?

I only wish the Banano Family Party was a joke.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Re: RE: Why Change the Federa

Reverend Blair said:
Never mind Elmer, although the apple sure doesn't fall far from the tree.

Look at what MacKay did to Orchard...signed a written agreement an then turned around and stabbed Orchard in the back. Now Davey-boy likes to stand up in front of crowds and prattle on about ethics.

Look at Harper himself. He headed the NCC...a groupd that won't say how much money it makes or how much of its time it spends lobbying because it doesn't want to admit to being a lobbying group. How the hell is Harper going to fix that kind of problem?

Yeah, MacKay blew it. The thing that got me about the infamous Orchard deal was that MacKay had it sewn up, and he paniced. To me, that fit of panic, and the fact he instantly sold himself out because of it, makes him unfit for consideration as leader for a long, long time. We don't need someone that unsure of himself.

As for Harper, better the NCC, which, even if you disagree with it, is at least an organization that works within the legal framework, than the Liberal Party of Canada.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
[
Parliamentary reform- I suppose this means proportional representation. It was rejected in BC and yesterday PEI. Canadian's don't want it?

That, and many other things, like free votes, a real ethics commissioner responsible to Parliament, Parliamentary oversight of judicial appointments, etc.

Senate reform- a non-issue. The Senate has no real power and shouldn't have any. How they are selected really doesn't matter. The ruling party likes to keep the present system as a place to reward their court jesters. All parties like this system in practice
.

The Senate certainly does not match the House, nor should it, but it does have power. I would simply like to see the PM appoint any Senators that are elected, let the provinces decide whether to elect them or not.

The Military is a bottomless pit for money. They tend to spend friviously, old technologically backward British Junk, but there is no doubt those in the line should be amongst the best equipped in the world. Probably a capital budget around 7 billion per years would be reasonable. I don't think this will go over well with the tax-payer.

The budget now is between 12 and 13 billion dollars. They let those damn subs sit around in salt water for 10 years while Chretien dithered. And yes, line soldiers should be equiped with the best, most importantly the best training.

It's Tommy this and Tommy that, throw him out the brute; but it's Tommy Saviour of our Country, when the guns begin to shoot. Kipling, but still relevant.

Ain't that the truth.

Sensible Child-care- You want little Johnny- you look after him. The state doesn't breed him, why should it look after him? A form of assistance is great, but the prime responsibity is the breeding pair.

I agree, to an extent. We should be encouraging Canadians to have kids, up to the point they reach a replacement level. Also, as our population ages, we need more and better workers to support the increasing number of old farts.

I think the idea of universal day care is insane. The Quebec experience shows it is used disproportionally by upper middle class folks. It is a welfare scheme for the well-to-do. Typical Liberal plan.

Tax incentives and increased child tax credit aimed at working poor families, and perhaps a bonus for those who have one parent home. That is the Conservative way.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
As for Harper, better the NCC, which, even if you disagree with it, is at least an organization that works within the legal framework, than the Liberal Party of Canada.

The NCC skirts legality by not disclosing how much money it gets, where the money comes from, and how much time and money they spend on lobbying. They do lobby though...including taking politicians on plane rides...so for them to deny being a lobby group is inherently dishonest and corrupt.
 

mascot

New Member
Nov 28, 2005
1
0
1
I really do not like there attitude of superiority, for years they have looked at Canadians as dummies, partially because they really are the only ones that stands, lucky enough in Quebec we have our own party, witch all provinces should have there own. That is the only way a province would be represented fairly.Ottawa should regulate not dictated.
The mini budget just before the announce of the election is a real proof of the Liberals that they take Canadians for idiots
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
Reverend Blair said:
As for Harper, better the NCC, which, even if you disagree with it, is at least an organization that works within the legal framework, than the Liberal Party of Canada.

The NCC skirts legality by not disclosing how much money it gets, where the money comes from, and how much time and money they spend on lobbying. They do lobby though...including taking politicians on plane rides...so for them to deny being a lobby group is inherently dishonest and corrupt.

I'm still waiting to see Harper's itemized expense accounts, line by line. He's got a big mouth, but where's his balls? I want to see what meals HE expensed.
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Reverend Blair said:
As for Harper, better the NCC, which, even if you disagree with it, is at least an organization that works within the legal framework, than the Liberal Party of Canada.

The NCC skirts legality by not disclosing how much money it gets, where the money comes from, and how much time and money they spend on lobbying. They do lobby though...including taking politicians on plane rides...so for them to deny being a lobby group is inherently dishonest and corrupt.

Can you prove this?
 

Durgan

Durgan
Oct 19, 2005
248
0
16
Brantford, ON
www.durgan.org
http://jamlette.notlong.com

Harper starts off the campaign with his vision of Canada.
Is this dead stupid issue of any importance?
Stockwell Day was accused of using his teenage son and his wife as his political advisors. I might ask who advises Harper. Again the Liberals are going to win by default.

Harper vows free vote on gay marriage
Nov. 29, 2005. 02:13 PM
CANADIAN PRESS


OTTAWA — Conservative Leader Stephen Harper launched his campaign today by steering it straight into the electoral turbulence of gay marriage.

A Conservative government would move to restore the traditional definition of marriage if Parliament supports the idea, he said...
 

tracy

House Member
Nov 10, 2005
3,500
48
48
California
One more reason I can't see voting for Harper's party. If this is what he thinks really matters for the government to do, then we are not on the same page.