Anyone dislike Bush, but voting for Harper?

[BigB]

Bush and Harper are the modern day Gepetto and Pinocchio. Let's learn the Star Spangled Banner! He will take orders all the way!

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.co...71105034659.photo01.photo.default-384x267.jpg :twisted:

 

[I think not]

If I had to compare policies, I would say Stephen Harper is more like John McCain perhaps in the US. Bush, for a lack of a better phrase is....unique? :lol:

 

[I think not]

Yeah BigB just a word of advice, you want to distance yourself from the US? Stop creating markets for the US in Canada.

 

[Triple_R]

Freethinker - No offense, but you'd have to be naive to think that judges are completely, and utterly, impartial. They're only human like the rest of us... and, perhaps more importantly, the politicians who appointed them are very human, and fallible, like the rest of us. Obviously, a left-leaning politician will probably appoint a left-leaning judge; likewise, a right-leaning politician will probably appoint a right-leaning judge. This will have varying degrees of impact on court rulings, but it will have some impact at least.

I don't see the controversy here. I follow American politics closely, and the Eminent Domain ruling that their SCOTUS made was pure, unadulterated crap. It required interepreting the American constitution to mean the exact opposite of its own wording. This was clearly a purely politically-biased ruling.

Actually, it's high-time that we started highlighting how politics is already playing a role in our court system. Long before Harper said much of anything on the matter, it's been playing a role. It does us no good to stick our heads in the sand, and think that judges are perfectly unbiased robots that always make the right decision... because they're not.

Furthermore, "regressive tax breaks"... if by that, you mean a tax break on a regressive tax, I agree with you. GST is the only tax that the poorest of Canadians have to pay.

Finally, anybody who is bothered by "God bless *insert your country here*" needs to grow up. I don't want religious fundamentalists running Canada, but nor should we be catering to thin-skinned secular fundamentalism. Getting offended by "God bless Canada" is like getting offended by "Merry Christmas". Most people see it for the warm statement that it is, and aren't oh-so-offended by the light touch of religion.

 

[jimmoyer]

Good point, Triple_R about the judges. It's a good
counterpoint to freethinker saying no one talked
about activist judges before.

And the flip flop on tax policy by both liberals
and conservatives defy any similarity to the Democrats
and Republicans.

Canadians are ill-suited to see that Harper will
be Canadian and no one takes orders from another
country without protest.

 

[earth_as_one]

What does Harper mean when he says "God Bless Canada"? Is that some sort of code to Christian fundamentalists? Its the same sort of wrap yourself in God BS God-hearing Bush says all the time.

Harper is anti-Kyoto, pro-ballistic missile defense, anti-same sex marriage and pro-Iraq war.

http://www.notacolony.ca/HarperonUSA.htm

Despite these unpopular pro-American viewpoints, Harper is poised to become the most pro-Bush regime leader in the west. How soon Canadians forget.

 

[the caracal kid]

Actually Triple,

there was a study on the "impariality" of the courts (i iwish i had a link) and it found that once appointed the judges tend to be quite impartial no matter how much the favoured a party beforehand.

This impartiality has not been an issue in canada until Harper made it an issue.

The GST is a sound taxation system that accounts for low income earners through tax-exemptions and refunds. Ideally, i would like to see canadians pay taxes only at one end, but we need to be realistic about our debts.

"god bless" is not about secular fundamentalism. It is about knowing your audience. Speaking to a mixed audience should not include language that is exclusionary and divisive if one wants to appear to be a "uniter". Harper has failed to show any real ability to unite anything other than "the right", and that is mostly an illusion presented by silencing the extremists. What does that really say about Harper's style and abilities?

 

[jimmoyer]

Caracal_kid, the point was NOT impartiality of judges
but rather ACTIVISM, in the sense that interpretation
creates new law traditionally left to legislatures.

This is an age-old conflict inherent in any judiciary
system whether it is noticed publicly or not.

 

[Triple_R]

Re: RE: Anyone dislike Bush, but voting for Harper?

Actually Triple,

there was a study on the "impariality" of the courts (i iwish i had a link) and it found that once appointed the judges tend to be quite impartial no matter how much the favoured a party beforehand.

This impartiality has not been an issue in canada until Harper made it an issue.

The GST is a sound taxation system that accounts for low income earners through tax-exemptions and refunds. Ideally, i would like to see canadians pay taxes only at one end, but we need to be realistic about our debts.

"god bless" is not about secular fundamentalism. It is about knowing your audience. Speaking to a mixed audience should not include language that is exclusionary and divisive if one wants to appear to be a "uniter". Harper has failed to show any real ability to unite anything other than "the right", and that is mostly an illusion presented by silencing the extremists. What does that really say about Harper's style and abilities?

No offense, but if you can't even link me to the study, I'm not exactly swayed by you mentioning it. I've read about a lot of studies - and I've ready about one study contradicting another study - I'm less concerned with a study's result than who conducting the study, what factors were taken into consideration for the study, etc... , etc... .

Harper never made "an issue" out of it, he simply pointed to how the courts would likely provided a check and balance on a Conservative majority government - and so it would.

The GST is a regressive tax system. Income Tax is much preferable. GST tax cuts OBVIOUSLY help the poorest Canadians more than income tax cuts do.

"God bless *insert your country here" is not exclusionary, or devisive (except perhaps to those who need to grow up). The vast majority of Canadians (including a wide variety of different faith, and non-faith, backgrounds) believe in God. Those who don't should care less (as per my Luke Skywalker/Superman point made about a week ago).

Harper has shown incredible uniting ability. He has earned gains for the Conservatives in Quebec that were previous unimaginable. Here's an old Reform party MP that's going over very wll in Quebec! That takes A LOT of leadership, and skill, my friend.

 

[the caracal kid]

well,

you need to see how our screwy system works.
we have career politicians that fear challenging the status quo.
Don't rock the boat too much, especially when it is so
easy to just "ride the tide" and collect your pension.
we lack political visionaries.
we need the judges to push the system.
most of our progress comes from the courts.
look at Martin. He needs a poke with the pointy stick to actually bring about progressive policy.
Who holds the stick? In a minority it would be the NDP.
But the NDP comes with "big spending" baggage as well.
The courts on the other hand can give a good poking without said baggage.

We need our courts to work the way they do.
Only the regressives are unhappy with the courts
becuase the courts bring change,
and they would rather live back in the "good old days".

edit:
triple,
to add:
the GST is a necessary tax and functional tax. The savings to the poor are so miniscule it really is not worth mentioning. Like i said, i am not a fan of taxation on your dollar twice (income + at the register) but given our financial condition it is necessary.

again: references to a "god" is divisive because not all people follow harper's god. as to your superman statement, would you really trust a man saying "He-man bless canada"? It is a division when not all people believe the same thing, and Harper has to see that. Harper is a "used car salesman". Notice how all he has done is give slick presentations to the populace? All he does is play on their desires and yet has no substance to unite this country. His pandering would without balancing the powers would only further divide the country.

 

[Triple_R]

You know, if I lived in a majority Muslim country, and a political leader said "Allah bless our country!", I wouldn't be offended one bit. If I lived in a majority Jewish country, and a political leader said "Yahweh bless our country!", I wouldn't be offended one bit.

These are SILLY things to get upset over, and it's exactly due to such petty, little, mindlessly anti-religion things as this that I shake my head at the left, and find it hard to take them seriously sometimes. The right says some crazy things to, but the left are so politically correct sometimes that it actually makes me sick to my stomache.

Saying "God bless *insert your country here*" does not mean that those who don't believe in God are suddenly non-citizens. It doesn't meant that your country is a theocracy. It doesn't mean that only the Christian God, or the Jewish God, or the Islamic God, is being referenced. "God" is a generic term (something that the secular fundamentalists tend to forget). Mulims speak of God. Jews speak of God. Christians speak of God. Sikhs speak of God. Hindus speak of God. "God" is an inherently diversified term, conjuring up very different images in the minds of different people.

If Harper had said "Jesus bless Canada", I could see the concern. But he didn't say that.

 

[Freethinker]

Re: RE: Anyone dislike Bush, but voting for Harper?

Caracal_kid, the point was NOT impartiality of judges
but rather ACTIVISM, in the sense that interpretation
creates new law traditionally left to legislatures.

This is an age-old conflict inherent in any judiciary
system whether it is noticed publicly or not.

Harpers original charges of activism, method of appointments, and the answer criticism:

http://www.bccla.org/positions/dueprocess/04judicial appointments.htm

 

[jimmoyer]

Only the regressives are unhappy with the courts
becuase the courts bring change,
----------------------Caracal_kid-------------------------

That's judicial activism.

The very definition of it.

And many have accepted the unelected to bring
change that was formerly reserved to our elected
legislatures.

Any conservative worth his salt has the right
to bring clarity to who is annointed to create law
and thus create public policy.

Liberals everywhere have sought the courts to
create law by expanding or changing the original intent
of a law instead of pushing for consensus in
an elected legislature.

Admittely this area of who creates law becomes
grey.

But it is no sin to bring clarity by questioning who
should have this power of creating law.

 

[I think not]

Here you go guys, everything you ever wanted to know about Harper and were afraid to ask.

Link

 

[the caracal kid]

triple,

i am not upset about harper saying it, i am bothered by the conditions under which he said it and the connotations that come from that.

And remember, he who says such a thing without other clarification is referencing their own deity, so don't play the "it is generic" card (other than that the god of judaism, christianity, and islam is the same god). It is rather silly to say a reference to "god" has inclusive qualities for a group that believes in multiple gods or no gods. sheesh.

now this is getting more airplay than it needs, but again it is about harper playing the populace like the pied piper played the rats.

edit:
jim, the courts only interpret laws though.
as well as challenges to the charter/constitution.
the politicians then act on those decisions.

edit:ITN
funny thing about Harper is he belonged to the Trudeau fanclub.
then he blamed the NEP for Alberta's economic problems and went to the darkside.
(if i remember properly. it may be he only hated the NEP)

 

[Triple_R]

Re: RE: Anyone dislike Bush, but voting for Harper?

well,

you need to see how our screwy system works.
we have career politicians that fear challenging the status quo.
Don't rock the boat too much, especially when it is so
easy to just "ride the tide" and collect your pension.
we lack political visionaries.
we need the judges to push the system.
most of our progress comes from the courts.
look at Martin. He needs a poke with the pointy stick to actually bring about progressive policy.
Who holds the stick? In a minority it would be the NDP.
But the NDP comes with "big spending" baggage as well.
The courts on the other hand can give a good poking without said baggage.

We need our courts to work the way they do.
Only the regressives are unhappy with the courts
becuase the courts bring change,
and they would rather live back in the "good old days".

edit:
triple,
to add:
the GST is a necessary tax and functional tax. The savings to the poor are so miniscule it really is not worth mentioning. Like i said, i am not a fan of taxation on your dollar twice (income + at the register) but given our financial condition it is necessary.

again: references to a "god" is divisive because not all people follow harper's god. as to your superman statement, would you really trust a man saying "He-man bless canada"? It is a division when not all people believe the same thing, and Harper has to see that. Harper is a "used car salesman". Notice how all he has done is give slick presentations to the populace? All he does is play on their desires and yet has no substance to unite this country. His pandering would without balancing the powers would only further divide the country.

I must say that I'm taken aback by your comments on the courts. You're now essentially admitting that the courts ARE, in fact, activistic (and hence not completely impartial). Your simply arguing that you believe that this is a good thing.

I'm not arguing whether or not this lack of perfect impartiality is good or not - I'm merely saying that it's a reality, and hence nobody should be made somehow afraid by Harper's comments. He's merely pointing towards an objective reality.

Whether or not an activistic court system is a good thing or not is a lengthy debate that I have no interest in for the moment. I'm merely arguing that the court system is not completely impartial, and tends to lean along the same political lines as those who appointed them.

Nobody is saying that we should scrap the GST altogether (something that the Liberals, at one time, said that they would do). I'm merely saying that a GST cut will help poor Canadians more than an income tax cut will. You can downplay that all you want, but it's the truth. For a lot of poor Canadians, a few dollars can make the difference between having something to eat, or going with out. It's a significant difference to the poor, sir.

A reference to God is not devisive. Your attempt to work off of my analogy is poor, because even the most ardent atheist realizes that s/he's in the minority, and hence realizes that perfectly sane people refer to, and believe in, God. If the vast majority of the world's population believed that He-Man really existed, and was all-powerful (with Skeletor being Satan) saying "He-Man bless Canada" would not be a shocking statement either. Also, it is not whether or not you believe in Harper's God, as much as you believe in God period. If Harper wanted to be exclusionary, and keep it strictly to his God, he would have said "Jesus bless Canada". And then I could see the concern. As is, there is no concern - well, actually, there is. I am concerned with those who would take exception to "God bless Canada". These are people that are nothing short of grossly intolerant of religious people, and are liable to force churches to do things against their own scriptures. They are genuine threats to freedom of speech, and freedom of religion.

In any event, I find it to be the hights of hypocrasy for anybody who champions SSM to fret over how something as innocuous as "God bless Canada" could, somehow, be dividing the country. Due to a lack of nuanced handling of this issue, the SSM issue has divided Canada to a great extent. This is why I'd rather have politicians deal with such issues than courts. Politicians are likely to hammer out compromises that everybody can live. Courts tend to simply declare a winner, and the loser is left with nothing - that obviously breeds resentment, and divisiveness.

 

[Freethinker]

Re: RE: Anyone dislike Bush, but voting for Harper?

[
The GST is a regressive tax system. Income Tax is much preferable. GST tax cuts OBVIOUSLY help the poorest Canadians more than income tax cuts do.

Again? GST is the best and fairest tax we have:

Comments on the Conservative GST cut:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...k_051202/20051202?s_name=election2006&no_ads=

What other economists have to say:

* "Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid," McGill University economist Christopher Ragan told CP. People may like it, he said, because "it's the tax people love to hate."
* "I believe it's a poor idea," said economist Mike Veal of Hamilton's McMaster University. He said most economists would choose an income tax cut.
* Robin Boadway, a Queen's University economist, suggests another way to help low-income earners: increasing the refundable GST tax credit. He also told CP that Conservatives are actually looking for way to cut government revenue and thus spending, with an eye to reducing the overall size of the federal government and bolster the provinces.
* "Canada's problem is a productivity problem -- that's been identified," John Johnston, chief strategist with Harbour Group at RBC Dominion Securities Inc, told The Globe and Mail. "Cutting GST doesn't help productivity."

CD Howe Comments: (Note this is right wing think tank)
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/01/gst-reac051201.html

"From an economic point of view, it wouldn't be my first choice," Bill Robson, senior vice-president of the CD Howe Institute, told CBC Newsworld on Thursday.

"If you want tax cuts that are going to promote work, going to promote saving, help us invest more and raise living standards in the future, the GST is not the tax you would go after."

Robson said it would be better to cut personal income taxes.

CBC Reality Check comparing them:
http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/realitycheck/taxing_inquiries.html

The GST advantage realistically really doesn’t kick in until you hit the $100,000 bracket. Because then you would only have to spend a little over 40 per cent of your total earnings to get a larger return from the GST break.

 

[jimmoyer]

jim, the courts only interpret laws though.
as well as challenges to the charter/constitution.
the politicians then act on those decisions.
-----------------------Caracal_kid-----------------------

So you say. But such is certainly not the last word
on the inherent overlap of interpretation when
it becomes in a sense new law, usually the preserve
of your elected legislature, not the judiciary.

This is an age-old documented part of judicial
and legislative history in any working democracy.

 

[the caracal kid]

well, triple, we will have to agree to disagree.

i think our political system should be secular. That is NOT to deny anybody the freedom to believe in whatever they want (so long as it is not harmful to others). It is a divisive issue to reference deities because deities stir up emotions, postive and negative for people. We need to leave the divisive past behind us. Think of the Muslim who migrated here to excape christian persecution, for an example. Religion breeds problems, and they are problems we don't need stirred up, no matter what one's personal beleifs are. Now I am for proactive understanding of religions so people can get along, but not for religions being referenced in our leadership. And again, look at the context under which Harper is playing this card and you will see it for the divisive nature it is.

now on judges, i am saying that once appointed they tend to not show overt biases towards the people that appointed them, but that they do act to induce progress. Judges have pushed progress under all types of governments in canada. It has not been an issue until Harper raised it. Unless Harper desires to reverse previous decisions it should not be an issue for him either.

 

[Triple_R]

Bizarre. On American-dominated forums, the American conservatives love the idea of a Sales tax. Indeed, many think that the US should scrap income tax altogether, and go with a purely Sales tax system. The American librals argue that such a change would be greatly to the disadvantage of the poor, and would widen the gap between the rich and the poor. I agree with the American liberals - there arguments are sound, and their math makes sense. Under a purely Sales tax system, the rich are liable to simply hoard their money (and you'd have less charitably giving since many rich people use that as a tax write-off). The idea that "savings" is good for the economy is utterly bizarre. The last thing you want in an economy is people saving up oddles of cash when their are numerous products collecting dust on store shelves. You WANT people to spend. You WANT people to consume. Consumption, and spending, are good for business, and hence are good for the economy.
High degrees of consumption, and spending, drive up demand which in turn drives up productivity.

How these economists aren't getting this is beyond me.