High Ho it's off to the polls we go.

[SirJosephPorter]

Having power consolidated and centralised with the national government is an excellent method whereby we can promote common goals and interests amongst Canadians, and foster greater national unity—the provinces are only geographic borders for the ease of administration, in my view; the provinces are (and should be) charged only with the legislation of matters that are strictly local in nature, whereas the national government should be the one concerned with everything else.

This is where we have an advantage over Americans; there the states have much more power to decide almost everything, compared to the provinces. On issues that concern everybody (abortion, death penalty, homosexuality etc.), these issues are decided federally, with a uniform policy all over the country.

In USA, most of such matters are left to the states, and it leads to a patchwork of legislations from extreme right (e.g. ban on abortion, making homosexuality criminal etc) to extreme left (no restrictions on abortion, legalizing gay marriage etc.). Extreme left for USA, that is.

Currently Supreme Court has decreed that abortion must remind legal, but the Republican Party is committed to getting rid of that decision.

Overall, in spite of the problems, Canada seems to work pretty well as a country. We are moderate; we do not tolerate extremists of any kind. Thus we never put NDP in power; Conservative party was out of power for 13 years, until Harper decided to move to the centre.

We do indeed have one of the best countries in the world.

 

[FiveParadox]

Re: 41st General Election

Who cares what it was "supposed" to be. If a tire is flat, standing around talking about how the tire "should" be full of air accomplishes nothing. The country is not sustainable on its current course regardless of whether it was supposed to be.

I do, and other Canadians should.

Our system functions exactly as it should, but unfortunately, the end-result is most probably not what the people wanted because they didn’t understand how to use the system appropriately at the start. Canada is absolutely sustainable on its current course, provided that the House of Commons smartens up and demands that the Government return the federal budget out of the red. What the system is supposed to be is of key and paramount importance, because we can improve our governance by moving, as a people, toward those intentions.

If I was someone new to Canada and wanted to learn about how its politics works, I wouldn't look to the gov't website. I'd try something written in normal English like Wiki. Wiki is easy to find stuff in, gov.ca isn't near as easy.

The House of Commons has released an absolutely fabulous, and everyday-language read (one which does not have some of the errors and misconceptions of the useful, though not-always-accurate Wikipedia® due to revisions by Canadians with misperceptions). The Compendium of Procedure can be found here—and though it doesn’t go through every possible answer or scenario, it is an excellent starting point for anyone looking to understand the Canadian system of government and legislature.

Nice theory but if they'd stick to standards for things that affect all Canadians as a whole rather than nosing into personal issues and things like that, we'd all be better off. Once they start microgoverning everything they become nothing better than a nuisance and a waste of taxes.

The Parliament of Canada does stick to federal issues, per the areas of legislative jurisdiction handed to Parliament by the Constitution Act, 1867. Like I’ve said (and I think that this may be a point on which we simply have a fundamental disagreement, AnnaG) the provincial legislatures are only useful insofar as they reduce the administrative burden of government for the federal Parliament. Issues should only be dealt with by the provinces when they would be too cumbersome to be dealt with by federal institutions. At the end of the day, I would argue that the provincial governments exist only to support and complement the role of the Government of Canada.

This is where we have an advantage over Americans; there the states have much more power to decide almost everything, compared to the provinces. On issues that concern everybody (abortion, death penalty, homosexuality etc.), these issues are decided federally, with a uniform policy all over the country.

In USA, most of such matters are left to the states, and it leads to a patchwork of legislations from extreme right (e.g. ban on abortion, making homosexuality criminal etc) to extreme left (no restrictions on abortion, legalizing gay marriage etc.). Extreme left for USA, that is.

I agree completely—I have seen such an unfortunate patchwork of regulations come forth out of the member states of the United States of America, I’m surprised that the people of the United States aren’t more concerned. For example, the fact that restrictions on same-sex marriage can be considered an unacceptable breach of human rights in one state, as another bans same-sex marriage altogether, is confusing at best, and a dangerous precedent at worst.

Currently Supreme Court has decreed that abortion must remind legal, but the Republican Party is committed to getting rid of that decision.

What recourse would the Republican Party of the United States have to achieve that?

Overall, in spite of the problems, Canada seems to work pretty well as a country. We are moderate; we do not tolerate extremists of any kind. Thus we never put NDP in power; Conservative party was out of power for 13 years, until Harper decided to move to the centre.

We do indeed have one of the best countries in the world.

Hear, hear! Fabulously said.

 

[Colpy]

Having power consolidated and centralised with the national government is an excellent method whereby we can promote common goals and interests amongst Canadians, and foster greater national unity—the provinces are only geographic borders for the ease of administration, in my view; the provinces are (and should be) charged only with the legislation of matters that are strictly local in nature, whereas the national government should be the one concerned with everything else.

This is where we have an advantage over Americans; there the states have much more power to decide almost everything, compared to the provinces. On issues that concern everybody (abortion, death penalty, homosexuality etc.), these issues are decided federally, with a uniform policy all over the country.

In USA, most of such matters are left to the states, and it leads to a patchwork of legislations from extreme right (e.g. ban on abortion, making homosexuality criminal etc) to extreme left (no restrictions on abortion, legalizing gay marriage etc.). Extreme left for USA, that is.

Currently Supreme Court has decreed that abortion must remind legal, but the Republican Party is committed to getting rid of that decision.

Overall, in spite of the problems, Canada seems to work pretty well as a country. We are moderate; we do not tolerate extremists of any kind. Thus we never put NDP in power; Conservative party was out of power for 13 years, until Harper decided to move to the centre.

We do indeed have one of the best countries in the world.

Is this guy EVER correct?

In the USA, the States have much less power than the provinces in Canada.

The strange thing is, the United States was intended by its founders to be a loose federation of largely independent states, and Canada was intended to be a unitary nation, provinces ruled by a strong central government.

In the United States, power lies with the central government....the ussue of states rights was laid to rest 150 years ago in the Civil War.........and the Federal forces won.

In Canada, the power of the central government has devolved to the provinces because of a succession of weak=-kneed federal gov'ts that are afraid to use the powers appointed to them by the constitution, and that constantly give out more power in attempts to attract public support.

 

[AnnaG]

"The Parliament of Canada does stick to federal issues"

rofl
Yeah, that's why the feds got involved with gay marriage; because it's a political matter, not religious or personal.
Seems to me I remember Canada sticking its nose into an issue involving someone who wanted to go out of the country to get better medical treatment, too. The only thing I can see it getting involved in there is whether to let the critter get back into Canada or not.

This guy developed quite a list of things (not that I agree with all of them, but part of it has merit):
http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2009/09/reducing-the-size-of-the-federal-government.html

 

[Cannuck]

Our system functions exactly as it should...

It alienates Kweebeckers and westerners and keeps maritimers on welfare. If that is what it is "supposed" to do, I say we gut it and start over. I really can't believe that you would actually defend this. I think people like you are a big part of the problem with your "maintain the status quo" mentality.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

What recourse would the Republican Party of the United States have to achieve that?

FP, by appointing Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe vs. Wade. When Sandra Day O’Connor retired, Bush appointed Justice Roberts. O’Connor supported keeping the Roe, Roberts want to get rid of it.

I think currently there is a 5 to 4 majority on Supreme Court to retain the Roe. If McCain had won, Republicans would have been able to achieve their goal. The replacement of Justice Souter would have been prolife, and today there would be a 5 to 4 majority to get rid of Roe.

 

[Cannuck]

We do indeed have one of the best countries in the world.

Hear, hear! Fabulously said.

I don't think anybody is arguing that we don't have one of the best countries in the world to live in. At issue is the direction it is going not where it is or has been.

 

[AnnaG]

I don't think anybody is arguing that we don't have one of the best countries in the world to live in. At issue is the direction it is going not where it is or has been.

Pretty much. So far what I see is that Canada could be a lot better, it isn't, partisan politics is a reason why it isn't, as well as federal gov'ts wasting taxes by sticking its nose where it doesn't belong, federal gov'ts wasting taxes on stupid things like firearms registration, federal gov'ts wasting taxes on stupid tv ads, etc.

Liberal Party of Canada » Watch the ads

TheStar.com | Canada | Leader's gut reaction to ads: Don't treat Liberals like fools

The ACTivist magazine - Paul Martin called on to Reject Star Wars: Canadians Say No To Weapons In Space

 

[Goober]

SJP – Your opinion is?

Well it appears that in Outremont Iggy has bowed to Denis Coderre’s hand picked candidate – and informed Martin Cauchon the former justice Minister that he will not be able to run in that riding.

Coderre also know by his Aboriginal name of “Mouth walking on 2 legs” - is a man of no character as we have seen over the past number of years – Yet he is the Kingpin in Quebec – Does Iggy not have any other choices than Coderre.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/09/21/jeff-jedras-liberals-are-making-a-mistake-in-outremont.aspx

 

[SirJosephPorter]

SJP – Your opinion is?

Well it appears that in Outremont Iggy has bowed to Denis Coderre’s hand picked candidate – and informed Martin Cauchon the former justice Minister that he will not be able to run in that riding.

Coderre also know by his Aboriginal name of “Mouth walking on 2 legs” - is a man of no character as we have seen over the past number of years – Yet he is the Kingpin in Quebec – Does Iggy not have any other choices than Coderre.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/09/21/jeff-jedras-liberals-are-making-a-mistake-in-outremont.aspx

Why would you think I would have an opinion on this, Goober? This is an obscure story, I haven’t read it. I don’t have any opinion on it. If Iggy has been heavy handed in selection of a candidate, he is not the first party leader to do so, and he won’t be the last.

 

[Goober]

Why would you think I would have an opinion on this, Goober? This is an obscure story, I haven’t read it. I don’t have any opinion on it. If Iggy has been heavy handed in selection of a candidate, he is not the first party leader to do so, and he won’t be the last.

SJP

No opinion on Coderre as the Kingpin in PQ – No opinion that Cauchon is given the heave ho – No opinion on Coderre’s Aboriginal name - Mouth walking on 2 legs – No opinion as you believe it to be obscure – Really in Quebec this will not be treated as an obscure story – You should know that -

 

[Cannuck]

You should know that -

"Should" being the operative word.

 

[Goober]

"Should" being the operative word.

Cannuck – What is your opinion on Harper?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

SJP

No opinion on Coderre as the Kingpin in PQ – No opinion that Cauchon is given the heave ho – No opinion on Coderre’s Aboriginal name - Mouth walking on 2 legs – No opinion as you believe it to be obscure – Really in Quebec this will not be treated as an obscure story – You should know that -

Quebecois will do what they want, Goober. They move in mysterious ways.

 

[Goober]

Quebecois will do what they want, Goober. They move in mysterious ways.

SJP
Surprising that you are hiding behind: No Opinion”

Cauchon was at one time the Quebec Lieutenant - .Both Cauchon and Coderre have been considered leadership contenders – How Coderre got on that list is beyond me – What is your opinion on Coderre?

 

[Cannuck]

Cannuck – What is your opinion on Harper?

I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Harper is fiscally liberal and socially conservative. That being said, he's probably the best of a bad bunch.

 

[Goober]

I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Harper is fiscally liberal and socially conservative. That being said, he's probably the best of a bad bunch.

Cannuck –
Read and enjoy the link – It is appropriate for all Politicians sucking up to everyone and anyone –

Could have posted this on another thread but you have to read Tarek Fatah’s article in the NP today –

Tarek Fatah: Has Jack Layton converted to Islam? - Full Comment

Take for example this year’s Eid message by Jack Layton. Addressing us Muslims as “Dear brothers and sisters” the NDP leader preaches the end of Ramadan “is an opportunity to renew the spirit and faith in Islam.”


I am waiting with baited breath to see Layton “renew” his faith in Islam. Will he be following in the path of Cat Stevens and Cassius Clay who became Yusuf Islam and Muhammad Ali? Or has he already embraced the ‘Shahadah” (oath of Islam)?
He goes on to say, “We are not celebrating the end of Ramadan, but thanking Allah for the help and strength given throughout this special month…”.
We? Oui! May I suggest a new name for Layton: Jack AsSalaam.

 

[Colpy]

SJP – Your opinion is?

Well it appears that in Outremont Iggy has bowed to Denis Coderre’s hand picked candidate – and informed Martin Cauchon the former justice Minister that he will not be able to run in that riding.

Coderre also know by his Aboriginal name of “Mouth walking on 2 legs” - is a man of no character as we have seen over the past number of years – Yet he is the Kingpin in Quebec – Does Iggy not have any other choices than Coderre.

[URL="http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/09/21/jeff-jedras-liberals-are-making-a-mistake-in-outremont.aspx"]http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/09/21/jeff-jedras-liberals-are-making-a-mistake-in-outremont.aspx[/URL]

Coderre is one of those Liberals that makes my skin crawl.......

 

[Goober]

Coderre is one of those Liberals that makes my skin crawl.......

Colpy you are bang on – But to Liberals, well Iggy appointed him as his Lord High Commander in La Belle Province.

Liberal Party of Canada » Members of Parliament
Liberal Team

Please Note that Stephane is number 2 on the list – Irwin Cotler as the Quebec Lieutenant would be appropriate. Smart – quick – But as Bob Rae found out at the last leadership convention – You know Bob Rae’s wife is Jewish – So Cotler is out as he is Jewish– and Mouth walking on 2 legs is in. And they wonder why people cannot support them – Coderre is a slimeball of epic proportions -
Members of Parliament from Quebec


Name</SPAN>

Denis Coderre
Stéphane Dion
Raymonde Folco
Bernard Patry
Marcel Proulx
Marlene Jennings
Irwin Cotler
Massimo Pacetti
Pablo Rodriguez
Francis Scarpaleggia
Marc Garneau
Alexandra Mendès
Justin Trudeau
Lise Zarac

 

[pgs]

I note the secound coming is secound to last on your list ?