A new political sunrise.

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
That it be the conservatives, the liberals, or the NDP in power, in the long run we will all be screwed either way.

Its just a illusion of difference, but in the end they are there for themselves not Canada.
 

Omicron

Privy Council
Jul 28, 2010
1,694
3
38
Vancouver
Ron said I have to point concrete references to things like music I might refer to while posting, so...

I am listening to this: http://tunes.digitalock.com/flowerofscotlandcorries.mp3 <-- click to play

Knowing as I do the leftward slant
What do you mean. Relative left or absolute left?

It's like fixing the position of zero on a temperature scale. Do you mean Fahrenheit or Celsius?

to several of the most popular posters on this site I thought I would chuck out a small dose of political reality.
You mean the kind of political reality where an ancient tribe of Neanderthals overtook some Cro-Magnon?
Canada once was known as a Liberal country at heart and the Liberal Party of Canada was known as "the natural ruling party".
No more.
The Liberal Party of Canada is now a shattered has been.

Change is a coming.
Oh joy.

You mean the kind of happiness to have embraced Europe after the Roman Empire collapsed?
PM Harper is a strategist and an incrementalist by nature.
He's just a f-ckin snark-spirited Albertan. You'd have to have grown up there to know what that means.


It took multiple Liberal majorities to slowly and thoroughly convert Canada's political, judicial, legal, military and civil services to a leftward orientation.
Meaning what? A society where people take care of each other and you can't stand that because you know that if everyone knew as much about you as you know about yourself you would never take care of yourself?
It will in turn take a long time and a lot of hard work to reverse that course.
Leading back to what? Tyranny? Gee that sounds like a lot of work.
Here is how it starts:

The blatantly Liberal Govenor General's Clarkson and Michaelle Jean have been replaced by a Conservative steady-eddy realist David Johnston.
I bet if asked you would not be able to say what you mean in terms of your social vision the difference between "blatantly liberal" versus "steady-eddy".

If you're not being paid to say what you're saying, I bet what you're saying is what works for you.

What you're saying is that what works for you to keep you in line is to be clobbered with a bat and thrown in jail if you don't behave, and you think everyone else thinks and is kept in line the same way, which means it confuses you to meet people who think.

http://tunes.digitalock.com/The_Corries_Twa_Corbies.mp3 <-- click to play
 
Last edited:

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
What change?

One group occupies the middle with the quiet lesser tendencies left or right to appease the base of the party. The Liberals used to occupy that space and now the Conservatives do. Policy hasn't really changed that much other than the trinkets doled out to the parties faithful supporters. Dump money into pet projects and cut the one's they don't like (usually that supported the oppositions base voters) and claim you hold the line on taxes, while cutting services.

There is no change here. It's the same game as it ever was. Of course they call it something new, but then that's been the way of the snake oil salesmen forever.
 

cranky

Time Out
Apr 17, 2011
1,312
0
36
A military for the purpose of self defense is kinda leftish. But a military for aggression in foreign lands is right wing. Since the military is run and financed by government, it is a socialist as the postal service or any civil service.
.
It seems to me that the right is more tolerant and accepting of others.

lefties don't want free markets to compete with their socialist agenda and would most likely want to make them ilegal someday.

yet righties have no problems with hutterite collonies, professional associations, group buying schemes, etc.

Only fringe group commies said that. If I recall, Stalin and Lenin were both right wing dictators with no semblance of socialism in their veins. They were both more fascist than socialist. Canadian commies were just nuts.

Fascism has a lengthy and often confusing definition. however, imo, Canada is more fascist when we have the Liberals in power because they like to get together with big business and work out protectionist schemes and protectionist policy. The CRTC is often used to protect large company interests like Shaw and Bell, and CBC.

Yet, with the Conservative, they lowered corporate taxes, and considering any small business that is able to incorporate for $800 so they can better manage their finances - you know - the typical small business with only a handful of employees. Yep, the Conservates are definitely less fascist than the Liberals.

Let me know when the military becomes privatized. Until then it's more socialistic in principle.

Sorry to shatter your dreams.

you are correct that it probably never will be privatized, however, I have a buddy that does civilian work on the electronics in Candian ships - onsite work. I have also noted that the sonar systems from the turrets are shipped to a private company to be repaired, the electronics for the CF18s are repaired at a private facility as well.

Better check your math. Just in case you did not notice 60% of Canadians voted left of centre; just as they have done for the last four decades. Also review the numerous left wing policies that were part of the Conservative platform. Certainly, 40% of Canadians gave the Conservatives their support, but it is a Conservative Party that no one from the 1980s would recognize. Any attempt by the new government to turn back the clock is likely to be met with considerable hostility; even from voters who supported the party.

well, I guess we will see some of that because the new government will be turning back the clock on some failed Liberal legislation related to the gun registry. Personally, I don't think voters care much about the gun registry as indicated by the lack of outrage when the registry was put in, and it will be indicated by the lack of outrage when the registry is removed.
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,888
126
63
He's just a f-ckin snark-spirited Albertan. You'd have to have grown up there to know what that means.
Harper grew up in Toronto so how does he know what a f-ckin snark-spirited Albertan would be thinking?
 

cranky

Time Out
Apr 17, 2011
1,312
0
36
Harper grew up in Toronto so how does he know what a f-ckin snark-spirited Albertan would be thinking?

he lived in Lethbride Alberta for a while. Not exactly the kind of place that is known for the stereotypical snark spirited albertan.
 

weaselwords

Electoral Member
Nov 10, 2009
518
4
18
salisbury's tavern
I applaud Mr Harpers choice of David Johnston as GG it is a return to a knowledgable protaganist for poltical & constitutional matters. I hope we've seen the experiment of "window dressing" GG's finished and a retirn of something more substantial.
The Speaker it was a foregone conclusion a Conservative would hold the post and its good to see the Deputy Speaker take over offerring some continuity to the post. What was somewhat suprising was to see Denise Savoie of the NDP as Scheer's final competitor and that it took 6 rounds to get him to the seat.
The Auditor General we'll just have wait and see whether Harper will put a "yes man" in the position or someone as independant as Fraser. If history is any past guide the new AG will get hamstrung much the same way as Kevin Page
Redistribution, increasing represenation in Ontario, BC & Alberta is a good thing, however there should be a corresponding reduction represntation in slower growing & over represented provinces Manitoba should loose 2 , Saskatchewan 4, Nova Scotia 1, New Brunswick 2, PEI 2 and NFLD 2 to better balance the reality of the country. Quebec of course stays at 74 or 75.
The Supreme Court must be above politics, it can only interrupt the law as it is enacted any complaint about "activist judges" is nosensical, if Parliament enacts laws with holes big enough to drive trucks through blame the Legislators not the judges. The constant bug-a-boo about the Charter is a sham the Charter is a "living" thing and all nuances must be ruled on.
The Federal vote subsidy it will be interesting come 2014 when the Conservatives being to feel the loss of the subsidy while readying themselves for the next election and the cost of the attack ads sure to come.
I'll ignore commenting on the Senate except to say the Senate is a Constitutional problem that cannot be resolved alone by the Commons.
Trex your OP is all about the structural workings of goverence & that is fairly cut and dried.
It will be interesting on the legislative & practical side to how the Conservatives perform.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
.

well, I guess we will see some of that because the new government will be turning back the clock on some failed Liberal legislation related to the gun registry. Personally, I don't think voters care much about the gun registry as indicated by the lack of outrage when the registry was put in, and it will be indicated by the lack of outrage when the registry is removed.

You are probably right about that. And that attitude will last until some nutcase armed with a long gun lays waste to another bunch of innocents. At that point there will be demands to add long guns to the registry once again.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
A new political sunrise? I'd have said it was a sunset, the beginning of a dark time. I've just been reading about the issues around the Wheat Board and what the Cons are up to on that file. You think you've seen contempt of Parliament and the democratic process, and plain old ignorance of history, from these guys before? Just wait...
 

cranky

Time Out
Apr 17, 2011
1,312
0
36
A new political sunrise? I'd have said it was a sunset, the beginning of a dark time. I've just been reading about the issues around the Wheat Board and what the Cons are up to on that file. You think you've seen contempt of Parliament and the democratic process, and plain old ignorance of history, from these guys before? Just wait...

socialist hardline monopolies like the CWB don't fit into a global economy. I just don't see how you guys can support it, unless you refuse to give it more than a few minutes thought while suggesting that canadian farmers are somehow inferior to the rest of the world.

isn't the general mantra "well if we all stand together, we can get a better overal price than we can in a free market"?

geez, guys, this isn't 1943 anymore. competition and growth is what keeps an industry strong and viable. if you cap the farmer's income potential or - heaven forbid - subsidize them, you just create an industry that exists further and further outside of reality.

Furthermore, the CWB's own surveys indicate that there is only about a 30% support for them by farmers.

You speak of democracy. well the farmers need their democracatic say in their businesses.

Let them vote for the CWB to become an optional program.......yes, this doesn't have to be an all or nothing debate. A CWB that operates in a free market can still exist, and if it is truly creating value for farmers, we will find a high percentage opting in.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
socialist hardline monopolies like the CWB don't fit into a global economy. I just don't see how you guys can support it, unless you refuse to give it more than a few minutes thought while suggesting that canadian farmers are somehow inferior to the rest of the world.

isn't the general mantra "well if we all stand together, we can get a better overal price than we can in a free market"?

geez, guys, this isn't 1943 anymore. competition and growth is what keeps an industry strong and viable. if you cap the farmer's income potential or - heaven forbid - subsidize them, you just create an industry that exists further and further outside of reality.

Furthermore, the CWB's own surveys indicate that there is only about a 30% support for them by farmers.

You speak of democracy. well the farmers need their democracatic say in their businesses.

Let them vote for the CWB to become an optional program.......yes, this doesn't have to be an all or nothing debate. A CWB that operates in a free market can still exist, and if it is truly creating value for farmers, we will find a high percentage opting in.

The problem with allowing farmers to opt out of the Canadian Wheat Board is that it really makes the organization irrelevant. If farmers can jump from the organization any time they please in order to take advantage of higher demand for their product then there is really is no logical reason for any farmer to remain a member. The problem with that is that the desire to operate outside the CWB's monopoly only occurs when world demand for grain is high. When demand drops members are quite happy to be a part of the CWB which really is a case of wanting to eat your cake and have it too.

It is interesting to note that the Americans have long criticized the CWB for giving Canada an unfair advantage when global demand for grain is low. In addition, leaving the CWB would place Canadian grain farmers at the mercy of giant international agricultural oligopolies which could care less about the interests of the Canadian farmer.

Finally, grain production is already heavily subsidized in other nations. The EU has huge agricultural subsidies on almost all products, and the USA and Japan regularly shovel billions into the pockets of farmers. Unless the rest of the world is prepared to play by the same free market rules opponents of the CWB advocate Canadian farmers might find themselves in a real dog eat dog market with nothing to fall back on if world grain prices decline.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,372
14,303
113
Low Earth Orbit
he lived in Lethbride Alberta for a while. Not exactly the kind of place that is known for the stereotypical snark spirited albertan.
He probably got beat up by the native kids consistantly. It explains a lot.

BTW...when sunrise is used in a sentence with political, it means communist.

You're right the New Dawn of socialism is here and now.





Check out the guy on the "right".







I think we need to invade a peaceful nation like France before it kicks in WTF is going on.
 

Fingertrouble

Electoral Member
Nov 8, 2006
150
1
18
57
Calgary
Harper's version of honest transparency will come home to bite him on the arse. Canadians aren't that stupid....


You are so right!!!! Canadians aren't that stupid........and that is why finally they voted for a majority Conservative government.

The problem with allowing farmers to opt out of the Canadian Wheat Board is that it really makes the organization irrelevant. If farmers can jump from the organization any time they please in order to take advantage of higher demand for their product then there is really is no logical reason for any farmer to remain a member. The problem with that is that the desire to operate outside the CWB's monopoly only occurs when world demand for grain is high. When demand drops members are quite happy to be a part of the CWB which really is a case of wanting to eat your cake and have it too.

It is interesting to note that the Americans have long criticized the CWB for giving Canada an unfair advantage when global demand for grain is low. In addition, leaving the CWB would place Canadian grain farmers at the mercy of giant international agricultural oligopolies which could care less about the interests of the Canadian farmer.

Finally, grain production is already heavily subsidized in other nations. The EU has huge agricultural subsidies on almost all products, and the USA and Japan regularly shovel billions into the pockets of farmers. Unless the rest of the world is prepared to play by the same free market rules opponents of the CWB advocate Canadian farmers might find themselves in a real dog eat dog market with nothing to fall back on if world grain prices decline.


What on Earth is so wrong with allowing a Farmer who's blood sweat and tears are put into growing and reaping his crops and then allowing him to decide if he should be a part of the CWB or sell HIS OWN crops on the FREE market at HIS OWN CHOICE????

And why oh why is that only CERTAIN provinces have to adhere to this farsical communist nonsense????
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,372
14,303
113
Low Earth Orbit
You are so right!!!! Canadians aren't that stupid........and that is why finally they voted for a majority Conservative government.




What on Earth is so wrong with allowing a Farmer who's blood sweat and tears are put into growing and reaping his crops and then allowing him to decide if he should be a part of the CWB or sell HIS OWN crops on the FREE market at HIS OWN CHOICE????

And why oh why is that only CERTAIN provinces have to adhere to this farsical communist nonsense????
Blood? Sweat? Tears?

Yeah it can be a bitch to program the GPS EZSteer so I can snooze while seeding.
 

cranky

Time Out
Apr 17, 2011
1,312
0
36
The problem with allowing farmers to opt out of the Canadian Wheat Board is that it really makes the organization irrelevant. If farmers can jump from the organization any time they please in order to take advantage of higher demand for their product then there is really is no logical reason for any farmer to remain a member. The problem with that is that the desire to operate outside the CWB's monopoly only occurs when world demand for grain is high. When demand drops members are quite happy to be a part of the CWB which really is a case of wanting to eat your cake and have it too.

It is interesting to note that the Americans have long criticized the CWB for giving Canada an unfair advantage when global demand for grain is low. In addition, leaving the CWB would place Canadian grain farmers at the mercy of giant international agricultural oligopolies which could care less about the interests of the Canadian farmer.

Finally, grain production is already heavily subsidized in other nations. The EU has huge agricultural subsidies on almost all products, and the USA and Japan regularly shovel billions into the pockets of farmers. Unless the rest of the world is prepared to play by the same free market rules opponents of the CWB advocate Canadian farmers might find themselves in a real dog eat dog market with nothing to fall back on if world grain prices decline.

the CWB creates a no competition setting for it's members but not farmers outside of it's grasp. Currently it's grasp is manditory for some of the provinces, not all.

To say that it absolutely won't work if you shrink or grow its grasp - and isn't that what you are trying to say? - is totally inacurate, imo.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,372
14,303
113
Low Earth Orbit
The killing of the CWB is going to kill any producer under a section of land which will mean he'll probably sell out or lease to a larger producer who can afford the shipping costs and market their product easier because of volume.
 

cranky

Time Out
Apr 17, 2011
1,312
0
36
The killing of the CWB is going to kill any producer under a section of land which will mean he'll probably sell out or lease to a larger producer who can afford the shipping costs and market their product easier because of volume.

really? is that what happens when a farmer grows a crop other than wheat?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,372
14,303
113
Low Earth Orbit
Answer this. How much denser is oil seed compared to wheat? Will I need one truck to ship a field of canola or two or three like wheat or barley?