Canadian Opposition Tries to Force Early Election

[PoisonPete2]

We need real political reform in Canada to stifle the corruption inherent in our arcane system of 'top down' rule by the political elete. The over-the-top corruption of Mulrooney and the gangsterism of Cretien should not be tolerated. A form of proportional representative democracy, with the government adhering to the election promises as much more than gingoism must be more than a dream.

Martin wanted to stretch out the election call into April (to his advantage). They can still pass important legislation and be on the hustings when Gomery hits. That report will have far greater impact during a campaign than it would otherwize.

Unfortunately, with Quebec almost exclusively BQ, the West strangely fascist (I don't remember what Mulrooney's goonies call themselves now), it is the '905' corridor north of Toronto where the minority? government will be elected. Those are the same morons who voted that nasty Mike Harris in twice.

Apec assault on free speech was Creten showing that he was not the protector of Canadian rights. PMs should be sworn to uphold Canadian law. He should have been turfed over it.

The Liberals have let the RCMP run amok in the intel field, an area in which they are incredibly inept. Everybody appears to be screened from responsibility by 'national security'. What a farce. On open, tolerant society may be hurt by terrorism, but never diminished by it.

No one has yet explained why Martin's steamship company was granted $160,000,000 while he was finance minister. Why the company was allowed to register their ships to 'flags of convenience' and thus avoid compliance with Canada's environmental protection laws on ship breakdown. I don't see Martin standing up to the Americans at all. Just making a few off-the-cuff comments for sound bytes and then on with the pandering.

As for Harper. The toady is waiting his marching orders from Harris, Manning and Mulrooney. All they want to do is to destroy Canada's social fabric by privatizing medicine, bash the poor to give their income to the rich, protect the interests of the corporate elete and spend huge money on military acquisitions (foreign made) so they can run off and crush the next country the U.S. must invade.

 

[Colpy]

Yup, we're going to have an election. I like the NDP's suggested date of February 13...that's about perfect and it's when Martin should make the election no matter when his government falls.

You Conservative types have to get a hold of your MPs and Stephen Harper, preferably by their throats, and tell them that this one had better be about issues though. You'd also better be willing to do some actual work when the election is over. People are damned tired of your scandal mongering, name calling, empty rhetoric, and sundry other crap.

Now that's funny Rev.

Considering the fact the Liberals have worked sooo hard in past elections to drown out any talk about issues with fear mongering............which you so love.

We're quite willing to talk issues. You have to be willing to listen.

 

[Jay]

Were is the fun in that, Colpy?

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Canadian Opposition T

I'm not a Liberal, Colpy. You never tralk about issues either, all you do is search for scandals and scream about corruption. Meanwhile the CPC lets meat packers (who just happen to danate to the party) walk away from conempt of parliament charges without paying a fine; either helps or allows one of their MPs to secretly tape, and then misrepresents what was on those tapes to the public; has a Manitoba MP who pleaded guilty to breaking Manitoba election laws; has another MP who tried to use his position as an Alberta MLA to illegally influence a legal case, then paid for his defense with taxpayers money; has a leader who went to court in an attempt to keep third party advertisers backing him.

We've all noticed the corruption within the Conservative Party.

As for issues...well, you've flip-flopped on healthcare so many times that you can't be trusted; have said that you won't try to ban abortion while purposely keeping the back door open; back US-style gun control (or lack thereof; support a US style war on drugs even though that has been a demonstrable failure; have a military plan that most Canadians disagree with and so on.

Basically, if you want to talk policy and nothing but, you will sink like a rock in the polls.

 

[Jay]

http://www.canada.com/national/nati....html?id=765312b3-f7fd-46bb-9cc7-593c9e3640fb

The Liberals are pledging a reduction in income tax over five years if re-elected in what they refused to call pre-election campaigning.

Now the Conservatives are talking about knocking a couple percentage points off the lucrative, yet widely unpopular GST.

The NDP aren't promising anything but are talking up a storm about bringing down Paul Martin's minority government.

Once that happens and an election is called, the election campaigning will begin in earnest....

 

[Jay]

We could play these two off each other all day....maybe walk away with paying no taxes at all!!

 

[peapod]

Of course :roll: :roll: the lap dog of anyone who will give you a tax cut. Sure no taxes for you, thats what its all about, talk about welfare, you got no problem tho being carried on the backs of the poor. mmmmmm...now I call that a bum!

 

[Jay]

It's a joke Pea.

There actually used to be a time in recent memory when we could joke about taxes. I wonder what happened?

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Canadian Opposition T

The attempterd destruction of civility in exchange for the greed of a few men in suits?

 

[Jay]

Your guess is as good as mine.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Canadian Opposition T

It's not a guess, it's an observation garnered from watching you guys in action.

 

[Colpy]

Re: RE: Canadian Opposition T

I'm not a Liberal, Colpy. You never tralk about issues either, all you do is search for scandals and scream about corruption. Meanwhile the CPC lets meat packers (who just happen to danate to the party) walk away from conempt of parliament charges without paying a fine"

;Last time I looked, the Liberals were the gov't. How do the Conservatives let someone walk away from Parliament?

"

either helps or allows one of their MPs to secretly tape, and then misrepresents what was on those tapes to the public;"

Must admit, this one looked sleazy. I don't like Grewel at all, but what he did was legal, and I don't think what was on the tapes was misrepresented at all.

has a Manitoba MP who pleaded guilty to breaking Manitoba election laws;

I'm afraid I have no idea what you're talking about.

has another MP who tried to use his position as an Alberta MLA to illegally influence a legal case, then paid for his defense with taxpayers money;

Day did get somewhat carried away on that one, but he had no criminal intent, made no personal gain, and has been burned hard enough he learned his lesson.

has a leader who went to court in an attempt to keep third party advertisers backing him.

You mean has a leader who went to court in defense of freedom of speech. The "gag law" went through the courts more than once, and was struck down only to be re-introduced by the Liberals. They simply kept trying until they packed the Court enough to back them. And you accuse Harper of being questionable on this issue? It is to laugh.

[

As for issues...well, you've flip-flopped on healthcare so many times that you can't be trusted have said that you won't try to ban abortion while purposely keeping the back door open; back US-style gun control (or lack thereof; support a US style war on drugs even though that has been a demonstrable failure; have a military plan that most Canadians disagree with and so on.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

All of the above is simply untrue. Fear mongering at its worst.

The Conservatives have a clear policy on health care....the provinces should be free to experiment with different forms of delivery in a publically funded system.

As for abortion, are you afraid of democracy and a free vote? The CPC will not introduce abortion legislation. No Canadian Parliament would pass abortion legislation. Subject closed.

The CPC has a plan for strict licencing of gun owners. That is hardly "American-style" gun control. (sigh, I only dream) In fact Harper voted FOR C-68, before it became obvious what a disaster it was.

The CPC was for the decriminalization of marijuana. How is that like the insane US "war on drugs"?

Most Canadians WANT a robust military, I believe.

Basically, if you want to talk policy and nothing but, you will sink like a rock in the polls

I don't think so, and I am quite willing to talk policy.....but it is NOT the only issue. Liberal corruption is an issue as well.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Last time I looked, the Liberals were the gov't. How do the Conservatives let someone walk away from Parliament?

It takes unanimous consent to levy fines for contempt of parliament in committee. The Conservatives wouldn't give theirs. Millions of our tax dollars, which were supposed to ultimately benefit Canadian beef producers, went to Cargill and Tyson in a year when they made record profits and our farmers were going broke.

Must admit, this one looked sleazy. I don't like Grewel at all, but what he did was legal, and I don't think what was on the tapes was misrepresented at all.

Legal doesn't mean that it isn't corrupt.

I'm afraid I have no idea what you're talking about.

Then you should follow the news more carefully. Vic Toews is the name you should be worried about.

Day did get somewhat carried away on that one, but he had no criminal intent, made no personal gain, and has been burned hard enough he learned his lesson.

He broke the law, then made taxpayers pay his legal bills.

You mean has a leader who went to court in defense of freedom of speech. The "gag law" went through the courts more than once, and was struck down only to be re-introduced by the Liberals. They simply kept trying until they packed the Court enough to back them. And you accuse Harper of being questionable on this issue? It is to laugh.

Bullshit. You watched the last US election. You are likely familiar with what went on there. Do you think, even for a second, that kind of thing should be allowed in Canada? Do you support the corrupt fallacy that corporations and special interest groups have the same rights as citizens?

The Conservatives have a clear policy on health care....the provinces should be free to experiment with different forms of delivery in a publically funded system.

No. The Conservatives have a very unclear policy on healthcare. Sometimes they support two tier, sometimes they don't. Sometimes it's something they can fix, sometimes it's something they want to privatise. Sometimes they agree with the Fraser Institute, sometimes they refer to Romanow Report.

Their hidden agenda on health care can be inferred by the way they move to the left when the polls force them to and to the right when their corporate masters ask them to.

mention a chapter 11 suit on healthcare to a Conservative and they turn white and deny it can happen. They can't say why though.

As for abortion, are you afraid of democracy and a free vote? The CPC will not introduce abortion legislation. No Canadian Parliament would pass abortion legislation. Subject closed.

Not closed at all. I saw what you did at the convention. I saw Stevie standing up giving a speech at an anti-choice rally when he was being paid with my tax money and refusing to do the job he's paid to do. The agenda is clear and the attempts to hide it are comical.

The CPC has a plan for strict licencing of gun owners. That is hardly "American-style" gun control. (sigh, I only dream) In fact Harper voted FOR C-68, before it became obvious what a disaster it was.

The CPC and it's supporters, and you are a perfect example of this, clearly favour US style gun legislation...or lack thereof.

The CPC was for the decriminalization of marijuana. How is that like the insane US "war on drugs"?

Wow...don't you get dizzy spinning like that. They changed their stance on pot as soon as the Americans barked at them. They cited trade and the need to keep the border open. They opposed needle exchange. They opposed the safe injection site in Vancouver.

Most Canadians WANT a robust military, I believe.

Yes they do. They do not want a robust military that backs the US to the detriment of the UN and peacekeeping though, and they certainly don't want members of our military coming home in body bags to pay for Dick Cheney's never-ending cheques from Halliburton.

I don't think so, and I am quite willing to talk policy.....but it is NOT the only issue. Liberal corruption is an issue as well.

Policy is the only issue. The NDP cam up with a 7 point plan to correct corruption...not just Liberal corruption, but all corruption. That's called policy. Meanwhile, Harper came up with a plan that would address present Liberal corruption but leave the door open to Conservative and future Liberal corruption...that's partisan (and very cynical) politicking.

 

[Colpy]

It takes unanimous consent to levy fines for contempt of parliament in committee. The Conservatives wouldn't give theirs. Millions of our tax dollars, which were supposed to ultimately benefit Canadian beef producers, went to Cargill and Tyson in a year when they made record profits and our farmers were going broke.

I didn't really follow this, and I agree that the meat packers walking away with cash while farmers went without was an outrage.

BUT this was a LIBERAL program, dispensed through a LIBERAL government bureaucracy which put money in the hands of rich corporations (Liberal friendly, traditionally) at the expense of western farmers.(CPC bedrock supporters) And somehow, this LIBERAL mess becomes the fault of the CPC? Spare me.

Bullshit. You watched the last US election. You are likely familiar with what went on there. Do you think, even for a second, that kind of thing should be allowed in Canada? Do you support the corrupt fallacy that corporations and special interest groups have the same rights as citizens?

I believe everybody, and every institution has the right to free speech. That seems simple to me. I'll tell you what, though. I'll agree to limits on private campaign advertising when the government surrenders its 120 million dollar a year advertising budget, much of which is spent on pro-government propaganda.

No. The Conservatives have a very unclear policy on healthcare. Sometimes they support two tier, sometimes they don't. Sometimes it's something they can fix, sometimes it's something they want to privatise. Sometimes they agree with the Fraser Institute, sometimes they refer to Romanow Report.

Their hidden agenda on health care can be inferred by the way they move to the left when the polls force them to and to the right when their corporate masters ask them to. mention a chapter 11 suit on healthcare to a Conservative and they turn white and deny it can happen. They can't say why though.

This is fear mongering of the worst kind. Even the old Reform Party campaigned on a policy of INCREASED, legislatively garaunteed levels of funding for Medicare. the proplem is the Canadian people don't pay close attention and were fooled by the "secret agenda" lies of the Liberals. That you would continue in such a dishonest smear attempt is regretable. How about talking issues and MAINTAINING some connection with reality?

As for abortion, are you afraid of democracy and a free vote? The CPC will not introduce abortion legislation. No Canadian Parliament would pass abortion legislation. Subject closed.

Not closed at all. I saw what you did at the convention. I saw Stevie standing up giving a speech at an anti-choice rally when he was being paid with my tax money and refusing to do the job he's paid to do. The agenda is clear and the attempts to hide it are comical.

No, your attempts to smear the party are comical.

[

quote]The CPC has a plan for strict licencing of gun owners. That is hardly "American-style" gun control. (sigh, I only dream) In fact Harper voted FOR C-68, before it became obvious what a disaster it was.

The CPC and it's supporters, and you are a perfect example of this, clearly favour US style gun legislation...or lack thereof.

Don't take my stand on this issue as representative of the party. Harper voted FOR C-68. The party's position is destruction of the long gun registry. That's about it. I am a radical when it comes to gun control. I do not pretend to represent the CPC, nor do I.

The CPC was for the decriminalization of marijuana. How is that like the insane US "war on drugs"?

Wow...don't you get dizzy spinning like that. They changed their stance on pot as soon as the Americans barked at them. They cited trade and the need to keep the border open. They opposed needle exchange. They opposed the safe injection site in Vancouver.

I didn't like the CPC backing off because of US pressure. However, with a CPC government, I'm sure someone would introduce a bill, gov't or private member, and I think it would pass with a lot of support from CPC members. I should go read the official CPC website for official policy.

Most Canadians WANT a robust military, I believe.

Yes they do. They do not want a robust military that backs the US to the detriment of the UN and peacekeeping though, and they certainly don't want members of our military coming home in body bags to pay for Dick Cheney's never-ending cheques from Halliburton.

And you accuse ME of spin doctoring. HA!

I don't think so, and I am quite willing to talk policy.....but it is NOT the only issue. Liberal corruption is an issue as well.

Policy is the only issue. The NDP cam up with a 7 point plan to correct corruption...not just Liberal corruption, but all corruption. That's called policy. Meanwhile, Harper came up with a plan that would address present Liberal corruption but leave the door open to Conservative and future Liberal corruption...that's partisan (and very cynical) politicking.

Actually, ethics legislation is one area in which the NDP and the CPC could work together.

Ethics IS an issue.

Your accusations of CPC corruption are just that: accusations with nothing to back them up. The Liberal Party is PROVEN to be corrupt to the core. The CPC is the ONLY rational alternative.

Vote them in.

If they turn out to be a pain in the arse, we (including me) can vote them out within 5 years.

That is how our democracy is supposed to work. By fear mongering and misrepresenting the character of the CPC, you contribute to Canada's degeneration into a one-party state a la the PRI in Mexico.

Thanks a bunch.[/quote]

 

[Reverend Blair]

I didn't really follow this, and I agree that the meat packers walking away with cash while farmers went without was an outrage. So, you're telling me ONLY the CPC refused to consent? I fid that hard to believe.

The BQ also said no, but they clearly stated it was only because they were not present that day and would have supported the motion if they had been. In other words, the motion would have been delayed, but passed.

The CPC was there and said no. They weren't willing to change that position. They killed the motion. They let Tyson and Cargill, both with connections to the CPC, walk away without a fine and without opening their books.

I believe everybody, and every institution has the right to free speech. That seems simple to me. I'll tell you what, though. I'll agree to limits on private campaign advertising when the government surrenders its 120 million dollar a year advertising budget, much of which is spent on pro-government propaganda.

Nice try at changing the subject, but corporations and special interest groups should not have more say in an election than individual citizens do. Allowing them to influence the outcome of an election through advertising is inherently anto-democratic and ultimately corrupt.

This is fear mongering of the worst kind. Even the old Reform Party campaigned on a policy of INCREASED, legislatively garaunteed levels of funding for Medicare. the proplem is the Canadian people don't pay close attention and were fooled by the "secret agenda" lies of the Liberals. That you would continue in such a dishonest smear attempt is regretable. How about talking issues and MAINTAINING some connection with reality?

The NCC was formed (by an insurance salesman) in 1967 to oppose the introduction of medicare. Stephen Harper has been owned by the NCC since the very start. Here are some quotes:

“I have been an active supporter of the National Citizens’ Coalition for a number of years. This has never been a secret, I’m a strong supporter of the things that it stands for – political and economic freedoms,” [46] he said. “I think I’ve been a spokesperson for those kinds of things during my time in Parliament.”

"At the news conference which announced my appointment as vice-president of The National Citizens’ Coalition, I was asked whether the NCC was really just a branch of The Reform Party. This is a curious question. For 30 years now the NCC has been active in political debate. The Reform Party has been in existence for only the last 10 of those years. It would have been more logical to ask if the Reform Party were a branch of the NCC!…The agenda of the NCC was a guide to me as the founding policy director of Reform…Elected officials are constrained by the need for popularity every four to five years. The average one is consumed by the monthly opinion polls. The really bad ones worry about the approval of every group coming through their offices looking for a handout. Working with you in the NCC provides me with an opportunity to do much more – to fight for basic conservative values of free markets and free elections, whether fashionable at that moment or not…The battle for political and economic freedom will have its victories and its setbacks, as it has in the past. It will never end…and we shall never surrender."

“GLORIA MACARENKO: Stephen Harper, what do you think of a parallel private health care system in Canada?
STEPHEN HARPER / V.P, NATIONAL CITIZENS' COALITION: “Well I think it would be a good idea. I think we're headed in that direction anyway. We're alone among O.E.C.D countries in deciding that we'll have a two-tier system but our second tier will be outside the country where only the very rich and powerful can access it and will be of absolutely no benefit to the Canadian health care system. So I think this has been the wrong way to go. And clearly we're moving in another direction.”

Universality has been severely reduced: it is virtually dead as a concept in most areas of public policy.

"I know this is a dangerous subject. My advisors say don't talk about it, but the fact is sometimes provinces have allowed in the past few years, they've brought in private services covered by public health insurance... Why do I care and why do we care as a federal government how they're managed? What we care about is whether people can access them. This is just an ideological agenda."

- Conservative leader Stephen Harper at the leadership debate, June 15th 2004, conceding that he shouldn't talk about his positive view of privatization of health care.

Clearly, Stephen Harper support privatised healthcare.

No, your attempts to smear the party are comical.

So you admit that you cannot refute what I said then.

Don't take my stand on this issue as representative of the party. Harper voted FOR C-68. The party's position is destruction of the long gun registry. That's about it. I am a radical when it comes to gun control. I do not pretend to represent the CPC, nor do I.

Don't flatter yourself, it isn't just your stance. It is the stance of every CPC supporter who has ever come to this board. It is also the stance they espouse on all of the other boards. The problem with the CPC's hidden agenda is that party supporters yap too much to keep it hidden.

I didn't like the CPC backing off because of US pressure. However, with a CPC government, I'm sure someone would introduce a bill, gov't or private member, and I think it would pass with a lot of support from CPC members. I should go read the official CPC website for official policy.

They've already made their position clear on this issue...they will do whatever George Bush tells them to.

And you accuse ME of spin doctoring. HA!

Nope. Again, there are things that Harper has said that make his position clear:

"Well, I’ve always believed that we have to be a lot tougher with undocumented refugee claimants. Whether the best thing is to send them right out of the country or simply detain them until we get full information, we can look at either but, no this is a problem that does need to be fixed. Particularly post 9/11, we can’t take these kinds of security risks."

- Stephen Harper, CHML Radio AM 900 Hamilton, June 3, 2004.

"I do not intend to dispute in any way the need for defence cuts and the need for government spending cuts in general. …I do not share a not in my backyard approach to government spending reductions."

- Stepehen Harper, Hansard, May 23rd 1995. Harper has since roundly criticized spending cuts in the mid-1990s.

"I don't know all the facts on Iraq, but I think we should work closely with the Americans."

- Stepehen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, March 25th 2002. As it turned out, Harper wasn't the only one who didn't know all the facts.

"It was probably not an appropriate term, but we support the war effort and believe we should be supporting our troops and our allies and be there with them doing everything necessary to win."

- Stepehen Harper supporting the US-lead war on Iraq, Montreal Gazette, April 2nd 2003. Harper also called then-Defence Minister John McCallum an "idiot."

"It is inherently dangerous to allow a country such as Iraq to retain weapons of mass destruction, particularly in light of its past aggressive behaviour. If the world community fails to disarm Iraq, we fear that other rogue states will be encouraged to believe that they too can have these most deadly of weapons to systematically defy international resolutions and that the world will do nothing to stop them."

- Stephen Harper supporting the American invasion of Iraq, House of Commons, March 20, 2003.

"This government's only explanation for not standing behind our allies is that they couldn't get the approval of the Security Council at the United Nations - a body [on] which Canada doesn't even have a seat."

- Stephen Harper supporting the American invasion of Iraq, CTV's Question Period, March 30, 2003.

"Mr. Speaker, the issue of war requires moral leadership. We believe the government should stand by our troops, our friends and our allies and do everything necessary to support them right through to victory."

- Stephen Harper, supporting the American invasion of Iraq, House of Commons, April 1, 2003.

"Thank you for saying to our friends in the United States of America, you are our ally, our neighbour, and our best friend in the whole wide world. And when your brave men and women give their lives for freedom and democracy we are not neutral. We do not stand on the sidelines; we're for the disarmament of Saddam and the liberation of the people of Iraq."

- Stephen Harper, Friends of America Rally, April 4, 2003.

"The time has come to recognize that the U.S. will continue to exercise unprecedented power in a world where international rules are still unreliable and where security and advancing of the free democratic order still depend significantly on the possession and use of military might."

- Stephen Harper, May, 2003, speech to the Institute for Research on Public Policy.

"Continental economic and security integration" with the U.S. as well as a "continental energy strategy" that should be broadened "to a range of other natural resources."

- Conservative leader Stephen Harper.

"A weak nation strategy..."

- Conservative leader Stephen Harper describes Canada's historic foreign policy position of multilateralism

"Nay."

- Conservative leader Stephen Harper voting against a motion urging the Canadian government not to participate in the US military intervention in Iraq, March 20, 2003.

Get the picture yet, Colpy? Stephen Harper would have had us in Iraq. He thinks multi-lateralism is a sign of weakness. He said so himself.

Your accusations of CPC corruption are just that: accusations with nothing to back them up.

I've backed them up, you have failed to refute them.

The CPC is the ONLY rational alternative.

The CPC is little more than a western rump party.

 

[Colpy]

The CPC was there and said no. They weren't willing to change that position. They killed the motion. They let Tyson and Cargill, both with connections to the CPC, walk away without a fine and without opening their books.

I really don't know enough about this to argue the matter. If you are coorect in what you say happened, you're right, it's outrageous. Which does not change the fact one iota that it was the LIBERALS who gave them the cash in the first place.

[

quote]I believe everybody, and every institution has the right to free speech. That seems simple to me. I'll tell you what, though. I'll agree to limits on private campaign advertising when the government surrenders its 120 million dollar a year advertising budget, much of which is spent on pro-government propaganda.

Nice try at changing the subject, but corporations and special interest groups should not have more say in an election than individual citizens do. Allowing them to influence the outcome of an election through advertising is inherently anto-democratic and ultimately corrupt.[/quote]

No change in subject, free speech is free speech. The test of unallowable free speech in my opinion is the old "crying "fire" in a crowded theatre" example. Leave it to the left NOT to understand what FREE speech means. That's why I deserted them 30 years ago.

The NCC was formed (by an insurance salesman) in 1967 to oppose the introduction of medicare. Stephen Harper has been owned by the NCC since the very start. Here are some quotes:

“I have been an active supporter of the National Citizens’ Coalition for a number of years. This has never been a secret, I’m a strong supporter of the things that it stands for – political and economic freedoms,” [46] he said. “I think I’ve been a spokesperson for those kinds of things during my time in Parliament.”

"At the news conference which announced my appointment as vice-president of The National Citizens’ Coalition, I was asked whether the NCC was really just a branch of The Reform Party. This is a curious question. For 30 years now the NCC has been active in political debate. The Reform Party has been in existence for only the last 10 of those years. It would have been more logical to ask if the Reform Party were a branch of the NCC!…The agenda of the NCC was a guide to me as the founding policy director of Reform…Elected officials are constrained by the need for popularity every four to five years. The average one is consumed by the monthly opinion polls. The really bad ones worry about the approval of every group coming through their offices looking for a handout. Working with you in the NCC provides me with an opportunity to do much more – to fight for basic conservative values of free markets and free elections, whether fashionable at that moment or not…The battle for political and economic freedom will have its victories and its setbacks, as it has in the past. It will never end…and we shall never surrender."

“GLORIA MACARENKO: Stephen Harper, what do you think of a parallel private health care system in Canada?
STEPHEN HARPER / V.P, NATIONAL CITIZENS' COALITION: “Well I think it would be a good idea. I think we're headed in that direction anyway. We're alone among O.E.C.D countries in deciding that we'll have a two-tier system but our second tier will be outside the country where only the very rich and powerful can access it and will be of absolutely no benefit to the Canadian health care system. So I think this has been the wrong way to go. And clearly we're moving in another direction.”

Universality has been severely reduced: it is virtually dead as a concept in most areas of public policy.

"I know this is a dangerous subject. My advisors say don't talk about it, but the fact is sometimes provinces have allowed in the past few years, they've brought in private services covered by public health insurance... Why do I care and why do we care as a federal government how they're managed? What we care about is whether people can access them. This is just an ideological agenda."

- Conservative leader Stephen Harper at the leadership debate, June 15th 2004, conceding that he shouldn't talk about his positive view of privatization of health care.

Clearly, Stephen Harper support privatised healthcare.

Now, if I could only find a word in those quotes from Harper that I DISAGREED with. Harper believes in publically funded health care. He also believes it could be delivered through private means.

The current system is failing. Dumb-ass ideological devotion to the ideal of a gov't monopoly on health care is suicidal, quite literally. Even the Supreme Court, those lap-dogs of Liberal policy, have recognized this.

]

Nope. Again, there are things that Harper has said that make his position clear:

"Well, I’ve always believed that we have to be a lot tougher with undocumented refugee claimants. Whether the best thing is to send them right out of the country or simply detain them until we get full information, we can look at either but, no this is a problem that does need to be fixed. Particularly post 9/11, we can’t take these kinds of security risks."

- Stephen Harper, CHML Radio AM 900 Hamilton, June 3, 2004

I agree 100%. I would take in legitimate refugees, and hold them in refugee camps, where they could learn the basics of an official language, and of the culture they are trying to join, until their bona fides were established.

[

quote]"I do not intend to dispute in any way the need for defence cuts and the need for government spending cuts in general. …I do not share a not in my backyard approach to government spending reductions."

- Stepehen Harper, Hansard, May 23rd 1995. Harper has since roundly criticized spending cuts in the mid-1990s.[/quote

]

I agree cuts were necessary EVERYWHERE in the 90s, and elsewhere on this forum I have given Martin credit for balancing the budget. What;s his excuse for strangling the military NOW?

[

quote]"I don't know all the facts on Iraq, but I think we should work closely with the Americans."

- Stepehen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, March 25th 2002. As it turned out, Harper wasn't the only one who didn't know all the facts.

"It was probably not an appropriate term, but we support the war effort and believe we should be supporting our troops and our allies and be there with them doing everything necessary to win."

- Stepehen Harper supporting the US-lead war on Iraq, Montreal Gazette, April 2nd 2003. Harper also called then-Defence Minister John McCallum an "idiot."

"It is inherently dangerous to allow a country such as Iraq to retain weapons of mass destruction, particularly in light of its past aggressive behaviour. If the world community fails to disarm Iraq, we fear that other rogue states will be encouraged to believe that they too can have these most deadly of weapons to systematically defy international resolutions and that the world will do nothing to stop them."

- Stephen Harper supporting the American invasion of Iraq, House of Commons, March 20, 2003.

"This government's only explanation for not standing behind our allies is that they couldn't get the approval of the Security Council at the United Nations - a body [on] which Canada doesn't even have a seat."

- Stephen Harper supporting the American invasion of Iraq, CTV's Question Period, March 30, 2003.

"Mr. Speaker, the issue of war requires moral leadership. We believe the government should stand by our troops, our friends and our allies and do everything necessary to support them right through to victory."

- Stephen Harper, supporting the American invasion of Iraq, House of Commons, April 1, 2003.

"Thank you for saying to our friends in the United States of America, you are our ally, our neighbour, and our best friend in the whole wide world. And when your brave men and women give their lives for freedom and democracy we are not neutral. We do not stand on the sidelines; we're for the disarmament of Saddam and the liberation of the people of Iraq."

- Stephen Harper, Friends of America Rally, April 4, 2003.

"The time has come to recognize that the U.S. will continue to exercise unprecedented power in a world where international rules are still unreliable and where security and advancing of the free democratic order still depend significantly on the possession and use of military might."

- Stephen Harper, May, 2003, speech to the Institute for Research on Public Policy.

"Continental economic and security integration" with the U.S. as well as a "continental energy strategy" that should be broadened "to a range of other natural resources."

- Conservative leader Stephen Harper.

"A weak nation strategy..."

- Conservative leader Stephen Harper describes Canada's historic foreign policy position of multilateralism

"
- Conservative leader Stephen Harper voting against a motion urging the Canadian government not to participate in the US military intervention in Iraq, March 20, 2003.

[/quote]

I agree with every word. As I've said before, our stab in the back to not only the United States, but our other English-speaking allies (Britain, Australia) is a case of national cowardice inspired by fear of reaction in Quebec.

Get the picture yet, Colpy? Stephen Harper would have had us in Iraq. He thinks multi-lateralism is a sign of weakness. He said so himself.

And he was correct on both counts.

You people continually ignore the fact that possesssion of WMD in Iraq was conventional wisdom. Saddam had used them, he harassed weapons inspectors at every turn, he constantly defied the agreements he made after the first Gulf War, he used the useless, corrupt UN as his own personal ATM in the oil-for-food fiasco, and he was a lunatic mass murderer who wanted to create a united pan-Arab state led by....Saddam.

Good riddance, thank God the Yanks at least have some cojones.

International law is a joke.

 

[Colpy]

"58. Abortion Legislation
A Conservative Government will not support any legislation to regulate abortion."

Copied straight from the Conservative website. Now, the CPC has promised to allow free votes on all bills excluding money bills and bills that are pertinent to their platform

This declaration will force the CPC to vote AGAINST abortion bans as a party.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Colpy, you are trying to ignore the back room games on abortion...or, to be more truthful...trying to encourage others to ignore those games. You know it, I know it, and everybody else knows it. It was clear at your convention that even the watered down, back door motion that you came up with would not have passed had a certain airline not gone broke. What did pass was clearly an attempt to hide the true agenda of your party from voters.

That you agreee with all of things that Harper said about how we should have gotten involved in Iraq is even more telling though. You and your party would have sent Canadian men and women to die in a war that was waged over oil. Such a party is unfit to govern Canada. In fact, such a party is unfit to govern any civilised nation.

You lose, Colpy. This is why you are sinking in the polls. People know what your leader said. They know what your agenda is, no matter how desperately you try to hide it.

There is only one thing worse than the Liberals in this country and it is the Conservatives.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

the stage is set...

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/11/24/ottawa-politics051124.html


harper is scary and too radical.... (IMHO)

 

[Reverend Blair]

Harper is scary, Ocean. It is doubtful that he will do much this time around though. Even if he gets lucky, the best he can manage is a minority and that will fall the second the CPC membership pushes for their social conservatism and faith-based "ethics" to be legislated. I'd give it about 6 months.