Harper Campaiging

[bluealberta]

Re: Hidden Agenda?

I have no intention of responding with the stereotypical hidden agenda rhetoric, lol, no worries. In my opinion though, for me personally, the Conservative Party of Canada is a bit right-wing for my political taste. Namely on the issue of same-sex marriage; I'm gay, so I'm sure you can see why I'd be more inclined to vote for an "establishedly" left-wing party.

:!: Edit Corrected a typo.

Hey, not a problem, I understand. From my point of view, the Liberal Day Care program has the potential to put my wife out of work, so you can see one of the areas I am coming from. Being from Alberta gives me another reason to despise the Liberals (Yes, I remember the NEP, saw people lose jobs, careers, houses, marriages, and even lives, and saw rigs headed out of the province by the dozens). Being the largest per capita contributor by way of federal transfer payments to the rest of the country without any say in how it is spent also sticks in my craw. Then the record of the last 12 years, well.............nuff said. :wink:

 

[FiveParadox]

My Hopes for the Election

My hopes for the Thirty-ninth Parliament are:

(a) That the Liberal Government of Canada continues to govern the House of Commons (whether or not the Conservative Party of Canada has more seats) with the aid and support of the New Democratic Party, preferably with the NDP's requests to the Government being slightly less radical, and the Government's responses to those requests being more respectful;

(b) That the Liberals and the NDP continue to co-operate to hold a stable Parliament, with more than a "truce" but less than a "coalition," to prevent motions of non-confidence originating from both the Conservative Party of Canada and the Bloc Québecois from defeating the Government; and

(c) That the reformed definition of marriage, as a lawful union between two persons, to the exclusion of all others, while recognizing a religious right to refuse to recognize those marriages, be retained and defended.

:!: Edit Corrected a formatting problem and typo.

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: Harper Campaiging

hidden agenda? no hidden agenda. the harpie agenda is there if you go beneath the rhetoric and look at the real man and the party.

Jersay, i don't agree with the "give him a chance" approach. If somebody is clearly not suitable to leading the country in a positive direction (or any direction) they should not be given a chance considering how expensive both elections and mistakes can be. (this applies to all potential PMs)

But Martin is not suitable either, and in spite of your NDP optimism, they will not form the government. So, your choice is to have a PM who has proven he is unsuitable, or a PM who, in your opinion, may be unsuitable. You cannot say he IS unsuitable, because you have no record to judge him, or the CPC, on, as opposed to the LIBerals.

 

[FiveParadox]

I understand your point-of-view too, bluealberta. I guess everyone's perception of the parties kind of depends on their specific situation, eh? Oh well, best of luck to both of our party preferences. lol

 

[bluealberta]

Re: My Hopes for the Election

My hopes for the Thirty-ninth Parliament are:

(a) That the Liberal Government of Canada continues to govern the House of Commons (whether or not the Conservative Party of Canada has more seats) with the aid and support of the New Democratic Party, preferably with the NDP's requests to the Government being slightly less radical, and the Government's responses to those requests being more respectful;

(b) That the Liberals and the NDP continue to co-operate to hold a stable Parliament, with more than a "truce" but less than a "coalition," to prevent motions of non-confidence originating from both the Conservative Party of Canada and the Bloc Québecois from defeating the Government; and

(c) That the reformed definition of marriage, as a lawful union between two persons, to the exclusion of all others, while recognizing a religious right to refuse to recognize those marriages, be retained and defended.

:!: Edit Corrected a formatting problem and typo.

...........so basically, you want a defacto NDP government without the NDP getting elected, either minority or majority, to be a government. I find that hard to accept, as I am sure the Quebec voters will find it, as I am sure the Alberta voters with separatist sentiments will find it. Your parliament will lead to the break up of Canada.

 

[FiveParadox]

Not My Intention!

No, no!

I meant to say that the Parliament would work essentially as it had during the Thirty-eighth Parliament, but rather that the Liberal Party would be more responsible to the Opposition in return for the confidence of the House. I don't think that any party should lead in the House of Commons as if they have a majority, if that is in fact not the case.

I think it's time that the respectful tone of debate in the House of Commons was restored. The last session was full of so much mudslinging that Question Period might have made some citizens feel literally dirty, lol.

 

[Jersay]

A large percentage of the Bloc voters are actually supportive of the NDP.

 

[the caracal kid]

I am using the history of harper, and the history of the reform/alliance/crap/conservative party as my basis for evaluation of suitability.

I would not call myself an NDP optimist. I would not expect much more than the usual handful of seats to fall their way. There has yet to be anything that would indicate any kind of shift to the NDP. I am not optimisic about any of the parties. Martin has done fine(not great, not spectacular, not nation building). His fiscal record is worthy of mention, but that was mostly as finance minister. He really has not produced an image of a strong leader with a strong vision yet. Martin is a filler-PM. A liberal leader similar to John Turner. (parallels could even be drawn between him and Kim Campbell).

Layton, he too lacks real leadership and seems like a lame-duck.

Duceppe is where my support lies. Separatist or not (and i am on the fence on separation as well) Duceppe presents an image of leadership and vision lacking elsewhere in federal politics.

So, if i were an "optimist" it would be for a coalition government led by Duceppe. One of the benefits of that would be both the cons and the libs would be forced to re-evaluate their platforms and choose new leaders. Perhaps we would see a leaner liberal party and a re-emergence of the PC party. Honestly, i find any scenario more favourable than Harper and his still-in-place reform candidates.

 

[FiveParadox]

Conservative Leadership

Once again, I must re-iterate my opinion that the Conservative Party of Canada would stand a far better chance of receiving a majority mandate from Canadians by replacing the leader with someone less right-wing than the current Leader of the Opposition, Stephen Harper.

Perhaps someone more "centrist" would resonate with Canadians more than do the Conservative Party leadership's current hardline right-wing policies.

 

[bluealberta]

I would not call myself an NDP optimist. I would not expect much more than the usual handful of seats to fall their way.

We agree there!

There has yet to be anything that would indicate any kind of shift to the NDP. I am not optimisic about any of the parties. Martin has done fine(not great, not spectacular, not nation building).

Again, we agree!

His fiscal record is worthy of mention, but that was mostly as finance minister.

Ah, here we really disagree. He "balanced" the budget only by over taxation, including, and let's not forget this, a $45+billion dollar surplus in the EI fund, which goes straight into general revenue. Here is the important part: That money came from employees and employers alike, which means it is a tax, nothing more, nothing less. And please tell me how a budget with a surplus of $20billion is any more balanced than a budget with a deficit of $20billion? Both, by definition, are unbalanced budgets. Remember, the government is not a business where higher profits are good!

He really has not produced an image of a strong leader with a strong vision yet. Martin is a filler-PM. A liberal leader similar to John Turner. (parallels could even be drawn between him and Kim Campbell).

And again, we agree.

 

[FiveParadox]

"Surplus" Misleading

The identification of the "extra" money appropriated after each Budget cannot in good conscience truly be considered a "surplus," at least not while the country has such a sizeable federal debt hanging over Parliament Hill. There is no need to lower taxation levels, in my opinion, until the nation is in a fiscal position where it has no debt.

 

[the caracal kid]

exactly fiveparadox. we should not be lowering taxes until the debt is paid off.

 

[yballa09]

i agree in that the debt should be payed off before any sizeable tax cuts are made. The longer we have the debt the more money in the end we are actually losing.

 

[karra]

Immhoo - tax cuts are a requirement and necessity - after all, if you have more money in your pocket what exactly are you likely to do with it. . . .

Some will save most will spend - spending, contrary to most far left thinking actually creates jobs - and when you spend you pay taxes, both provincial (unless your fortunate enough to live in Alberta) and federal. . .

So, cut away I say - the more the merrier - tax cuts = spending = jobs for others = a happy you - 'cause you just bought something you absolutely couldn't live without and wanted. . . .

 

[Toro]

I agree with Karra.

With whatever she says.

 

[karra]

Stop that Toro. . . .

Which one is you in the avatar - all I can see is the devil and the deep blue see. . . .

 

[FiveParadox]

Exactly. Last year, the Government of Canada collected approximately $186 billion in revenue (and taxes); however, it had to pay $35.8 billion of that revenue to pay interest payments on Canada's federal debt. That's nineteen cents out of every tax and revenue dollar, nearly one-fifth of the entire Budget.

One must keep in mind that, according to the policies of the Liberal Ministry of Finance, surplus funds are not made available for additional spending or tax relief; rather, they are required to be used to pay off the federal debt. For example, in the most recent budget passed, $9.8 billion was set to be paid into the debt as surplus funds.

Click here for more information about the Budget (the link is to a multimedia presentation prepared by the Ministry regarding the Budget — it's very informative).