Dissatisfied with Choices

[Jay]

I don't hear Harper calling for any separation. I hear him calling for respect of provincial powers, and it is about time someone stood up for those powers, outside of Quebec.

 

[Jo Canadian]

I don't hear Harper calling for any separation.

Of course he's not going to talk about anything dealing with separation. Who would do that before any election? That's like shooting yourself in the foot before the big race.

Mind you, I'm not saying that he may have separation of Alberta or the west in mind, but there are those that do that are backing him up.

 

[Knightman]

Geez! I wish all those MLAs and MPs would just do what they were elected to do - represent their constituents in the house - and stop all the senseless partisan bickering. After all, we do pay their salaries and expenses. What good is democracy if we don't have real choices?

Excellent point.

We can no longer say our elected represtnatives are innocent until proven otherwise, its obvious that "if they are elected, they will soon be dirty". The ones who don't play along with the culture of corruption in federal or provincial politics get shuffled out.

therefore, WE DO NOT have choices, it all the same once they get there.

Threats are common - one testimony at Gommery said he and his family were threatened. This is how its done, and they all shut up about it or they are hurt and die, yes die. Sometimes its a matter of making them commit crimes, as a way to ensure their loyalty because they hold that over them,ready to turn in evidence to the police if the MP ever turns on them.

Corruption means your tax dollars are going to Elites, and not to programs. Its crime, and its rampant. Every government function has money tangled up in it, from fishfarm liscences to oil royalties. And its all corrupt.

I HAVE THE ANSWER - never vote for anyone who has been there before, never vote for the "old-party" members. The NDP will likey have entanglements too, we could at least give them a chance as the party without corruption, but no , the unions have messed that up allready...
A house of independants. That would require some re-aranging of the house rules too - no party leader to be speaker for one problem. Change is good, lets do it, it is the only message they might understand.

You have pointed out why a change is needed. Canada's political integrity has not been all that stellar in the last forty years.

Our province is broke from things like transfer payments, and soaring medical costs.

Ontario Hydro drove itself 30 billion dollars into debt, and the Ontario government absorbed some of that debt, and the rest is being paid back by users of the hydro system. Harris did "privatize" it and there are independents putting electricity on the grid now, and much to our satisfaction, greener electricity is slowly being added.

An Ontario Issue, a Provincial Issue and Ontario's problem. How is a change in who is in power federally going to help Ontario?

I want things to change... but for the better not for the worst...
You don't chagnge something just for the fun of it. I know, we did this in the last provincial election (Quebec) and look what it gave us... We have the worst government ever in the history of this province. I don't want to live the same thing on the federal level.

Do you really think that having a different party in power in Ottawa is going to solve Quebec's problems? Probably make them worse and divide the counrty more is my guess.

You said it, on that front. And only this one. That's why you see technical alliance between tories and separatists. But it's no solution at all for the unity of this country, and it's probably the best way to make it break. Ontario will be the biggest looser, and it's about time.

You have this point nailed down, A change in the party of the moment in Ottawa will do nothing for Quebec or any other province for that matter. The provinces have to sort out their issues Our federal governments have only split the regions more.

ahahahaha :lol: Conservative respectful of provincial jurisdiction... ahahaha That's the best one I heard this week... Stop oplease you are killing me...

We've been fighting since the 60's to get religion, the queen, and the federal out of our air and you propose that we help elect a bunch of right wing, religious nut, union jack waving loonies... :lol:

ahahaahahhahahah...

What political parties that have came to power to form our federal government have ever had any respect for the provinces other than being forced to recognize their existance when they yell loud enough. Do we really believe that the current liberal party is dishing out vast sums of OUR money back to us becasue the liberal's actually care about the provinces, NO, they are vote buying, thats all it is.

They know separation is the only solution for what they want, but they don't have the guts to say it out loud because they would cut themselves up from Ontario. I so love the fact that BQ is only in Québec, so they don't have to act like prostitute hermNDPherm.

You are again making a good point here. our current federal government has to compromise to stay in power and by doing that it seems they do a great dis-service to all of canada. No one is winning with this.

OK, so anyone who supports Quebec and Alberta is a separatist? OK.

I support respect for provincial powers. If that respect can’t be accomplished than I don't see what the point of having the constitution is, and I therefore don't see why any state in Canada would stick around.

I am all for provincial power, real power to run their own affairs and to be in control of this country for intrests of all Canadian's. Not some self serving partisan federal government.

Wasn't Harper the one who wanted Firewalls up around Alberta? And now he is in bed with a seperatist.

An article from Macleans and this part is most interesting:

But how does that square with his more impulsive gestures, such as his op-ed outbursts after the 2000 election, in which he essentially declared himself for Alberta first, the rest of Canada a distant second -- a recklessly hotheaded move for a man with national aspirations?

Your point here is well taken and that is exactly how many of our political leaders behave. They are maintaining regional intrests while attempting to be the Prime Minister of an entire counrty. That is a conflict of intrest really and a good reason to change what the roll of our Prime Minister is.

Getting back to the topic, they all make me sick. Tomorrow I have to decide whether I want to vote for Gordon Campbell's liberal lap dog or the old NDP MLA. Any other option would be a wasted vote in this riding. I really wish I could vote for "None of the Above". But again I will vote for the least bad hoping that this time we will at least have an opposition. God this sucks!

It is all about compromise. but why should we have to compromise at to levels of government. Sure we have problems with our provincial choices but at least the are working for the most part ."For the Province" not some other intrest. Out here we have the NDP, fine, it is not perfect but I think our government is giving it a decent shot.

I have ot ask that question about "none of the above" when it comes to a federal election.

I totally disagree that voting for the BQ is necessarily a vote for seperation. One of the thing that the BQ keeps repeating and that doesn't seem to stick into most people's head (especially in the ROC) is that democracy isn't about about power but about having every citizen represented by HOPEFULLY honest people. Democracy isn't about power and the BQ has every democratic right of being a federal party.

Yes, the BQ is a seperatist party but Canadians have to deal with that. If Quebecers can't have their country, they'll do all they can to at least have their voices heard. Either Canada says "shut up Quebec!" and we seperate or Canada listens and finally tries to freshen itself up by truly adopting confederal politics.

Personally, I'm a seperatist as long as Canada doesn't give Quebec the political autonomy it wants, so the BQ is the way to go. For me, it's not a vote for seperation but a vote to try and impose change on Canada.

Quebec can have its cake and eat it to. So can all the other provinces. It is the Federal Government that is the problem not the provinces.

I don't hear Harper calling for any separation. I hear him calling for respect of provincial powers, and it is about time someone stood up for those powers, outside of Quebec.

I think we. the people of this country as a whole can stand up for provincial powers. Quebec is the flagship.

So tell me again why exactly we need to have two levels of Partisan politics running this country? With everything you folks have discussed in this thread so far can we not see the real truth of what is happening and what is responsible for a great deal of the animosity throughout the country. It is the simple fact that we have our current style of government at the national level. we need to change it because its not going to get any better if we do not..................

 

[Jay]

Our province is broke from things like transfer payments, and soaring medical costs.

Ontario Hydro drove itself 30 billion dollars into debt, and the Ontario government absorbed some of that debt, and the rest is being paid back by users of the hydro system. Harris did "privatize" it and there are independents putting electricity on the grid now, and much to our satisfaction, greener electricity is slowly being added.

An Ontario Issue, a Provincial Issue and Ontario's problem. How is a change in who is in power federally going to help Ontario?

The post I made there was in response to a question about Ontario.

Of course it is an Ontario problem, but if the people of Ontario have to take on 30 billion in debt, because some socialists saw a way to make a buck off the people again, it is going to have consequences nationally, namely the dollar might be affected. It also has an effect on health care in Ontario, and when Ontario raises concerns that we are having troubles maintaining health care, that can lead to transfer payment cuts.

Ontario would be at a great advantage if we had a change in leadership. We need to have relief from heavy taxes and a change in how healthcare is delivered and we sure as hell don't need to have the feds tell us how to run day care, and we sure don't need Ontarians to be taxed by feds who redirect the money to Ontario to provide healthcare, or education. And lower taxes means more jobs come to our region.

I don't hear Harper calling for any separation. I hear him calling for respect of provincial powers, and it is about time someone stood up for those powers, outside of Quebec.

I think we. the people of this country as a whole can stand up for provincial powers. Quebec is the flagship.

You would think that we wouldn't have to because we have a constitution already spelling out the divisions. It is a real shame that some have to threaten to separate in order to get that document followed. (And that still doesn't work, as the new idea of national day care has been brought up. It’s the Liberals vote buying on provincial issues.)

So tell me again why exactly we need to have two levels of Partisan politics running this country?

Sounds like you want to ditch the feds?

With everything you folks have discussed in this thread so far can we not see the real truth of what is happening and what is responsible for a great deal of the animosity throughout the country. It is the simple fact that we have our current style of government at the national level. we need to change it because its not going to get any better if we do not..................

I think the constitution does a fine job of dividing up the powers. It’s the socialists in this country who can't stand the fact that the provinces have any power at all, and wish for a central government to run provincial affairs, but their not communists they say.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Dissatisfied with Cho

Only somebody from the lunatic fringe of the radical right could consider the Martin government to be socialists, Jay.

 

[Jay]

And only a communist would consider him otherwise.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Dissatisfied with Cho

Apparently you are wrong. I consider that to be the case, and I am not a communist.

You might want to take a shot at wandering back towards the topic though, Jay.

 

[Jay]

And I'm not from the lunatic fringe of the radical right.


I was merely responding to your post.

 

[peapod]

No your not jay, you made that remark to goad the rev and try to make him respond in a certain way. Worst tho, I think you actually get your rocks off on doing it to. :wink:

 

[Jay]

Right pea, and the Rev wasn't trying to "goad" me into making certain statments was he....


Do you have a degree in Biasoligy or something?

 

[peapod]

more goading :roll:

 

[Ted]

See, this is another thing that gets my goat. ALL of the parties are full of crap. It never ceases to amaze me how few people out there GET THAT! Instead, they line up behind one or another party and spew bull crap. The arguments of ALL of them are just candy for public consumption. Most don't stand up in the face of unbiased analysis. That is when the insults start and the discussion ends. And the people in power love to watch us tear each other apart, because as long as we believe the lie that we can change things with our vote, we won't demand real change.

 

[Jay]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=goading


1.)A long stick with a pointed end used for prodding animals.

2.)An agent or means of prodding or urging; a stimulus.


Which one do you prefer?

I liked the first one.

 

[peapod]

I dunno Jay....maybe you could ask that guy in the sky...you know the one that is always broke :wink:

 

[Ted]

Ok, I'm new here, but I think my original topic is important, and I tried to interject twice to get things back to what I hoped to discuss with others. I can see it is pointless. I would like to bump my previous post because it got lost in the unrelated argument that has taken over. After that, I will say no more.

See, this is another thing that gets my goat. ALL of the parties are full of crap. It never ceases to amaze me how few people out there GET THAT! Instead, they line up behind one or another party and spew bull crap. The arguments of ALL of them are just candy for public consumption. Most don't stand up in the face of unbiased analysis. That is when the insults start and the discussion ends. And the people in power love to watch us tear each other apart, because as long as we believe the lie that we can change things with our vote, we won't demand real change.

 

[tightwad]

Re: RE: Dissatisfied with Choices

I would prefer to see Mike Harris in, rather than Klien.

Mike Harris the redneck????

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Dissatisfied with Cho

The redneck in love with guns, according to the OPP tapes about Ipperwash.

 

[Jay]

I thought this thread was locked?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=redneck

Redneck

1.)Used as a disparaging term for a member of the white rural laboring class, especially in the southern United States.

2.)A white person regarded as having a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude.

The site has recently undergone a flux of fighting, mudslinging, argueing and unnecessarily rude debating.

As of right now, any user joining these forums with the intent to get attention; to bash members based on their political views; purposely post to incite anger;

post racist,

sexist, prejudice, bigotry or homophobic messages; bash members for any reason; or posting without the sole intent of creating a clean and on-topic political debate ...


WILL BE BANNED WITHOUT NOTICE.


This goes the same with anybody purposely trying to provoke members.

So I guess we will all stop using the term, no matter how fun it is.

 

[Derry McKinney]

RE: Dissatisfied with Cho

It was the OPP officer that called Harris a redneck, Jay.

 

[Jay]

tightwad is an OPP officer?