 
Goat
Member
Username: Goat
Post Number: 8094
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 64.228.193.67
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 11:31 am: |    |
With that we can agree on.  Comartin has shown himself to be a very good MP for this area. I am lucky enough to be moving to a riding that has another good MP...Brian Masse.
In my travels into plants everyday, I do find that the "vote for the workers party" has been played so many times it is almost indoctrinated in those who work in those plants. Vote anything else and you are looked at as suspicious or the very least turning you back on your "brother". This is the way I see it on a daily basis. |
Upinottawa
Member
Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 151
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 198.103.184.76
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 11:50 am: | |
Blitz: the passport plan is still alive and kicking. The US is allowing American citizens to obtain a $50 border card (called "PASS") instead of using a passport. To enter the US, Americans will need to have a passport or a PASS card. Us crazy Canucks will need a passport.
The new PASS card option will still hurt spur of the moment travel. |
Fastcarsfreedom
Member
Username: Fastcarsfreedom
Post Number: 14
Registered: 11-2005
Posted From: 206.80.245.155
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 12:15 pm: | |
To further the NDP comments--I have to back up what Goat had to say about the "Vote NDP" mentality in workplaces where one of the heavyweight unions is present (CAW, CUPE, OPSEU, etc). I work in such an environment, and I can assure you that the union takes pleasure in telling me and everyone else who to vote for. They were even kind enough in this past election to mail out a letter to all members in this regard. Everyday I have to go to work and see literature, posters, etc. that openly attack the political party of which I am a member and the ideology and belief system I have had since I first became involved politically at the age of 15. On top of that, they take a portion of my union dues and donate them to the NDP--so techincally, though I pay my annual dues to the Conservative Party of Canada, I'm forced by virtue of my union membership to financially support the NDP. I've made the same argument in the past about taxpayer funding of public television, which at least in this country takes what I would call a fairly unabashedly left-of-center editorial viewpoint politically. Though the tides have turned in the U.S. in the past two decades, we as conservatives...large 'C' and small 'c'--remain at a disadvantage in much of Canada--we have always had to work harder to achieve even par with the left. As Tony Clement (newly elected in Parry Sound-Muskoka, and someone I consider a political inspiration) said recently in the National Post, in Canada as a Conservative, the opportunity to obtain power comes around maybe once in a generation, and you must strive to seize it if you truly believe in the conservative cause. The election of NDP members is heavily reliant on union membership and always has been, you need only to look at electoral history to see that--they do well in urban areas where there is considerable labor union membership, and that is not an oversimplification. |
Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell
Post Number: 2222
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 66.167.58.137
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 1:29 pm: | |
Fastcars, you prove my point.
quote:Most union members I know don't take well to anyone telling them anything...
As for the unions spending money in what they perceive to be their best interest, that is no different than a company of which I am a stockholder supporting what the company leadership considers in the best interest of the company, even though it is against my beliefs. Until truly effective campaign spending laws are created ~and enforced~ that's the way it works. Don't like it? Organize and take over your union / company. |
Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell
Post Number: 2223
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 66.167.58.137
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 1:40 pm: | |
Regarding the passports requirements, this is a direct attack on the economic viability of our international metropolis. Creating more barriers to free movement of people and commerce hurts all of us here. Look at all the traffic idling on the bridge and tunnel, millions and millions being wasted with the cost falling directly on the D. Other cities in both countries are not forced to bear this cost. It is discriminatory and should be opposed or, at the least, accomodation should be made, like free ID cards for anyone living within 50 miles of the border and more.
This is simply paranoia inducement by the scare-orists in Washington who are treating a tiny outlaw gang as if it were a superpower so they can waste our tax dollars. Even in the cold war and WWII, when we were fighting real enemies who could totally f*** us up, we did not give into this BS.
They play, we pay. |
Upinottawa
Member
Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 152
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 198.103.184.76
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 2:54 pm: | |
As far as the Conservatives (or conservatives) disadvantage vis-à-vis the NDP rants go: do remember that the NDP has never formed the federal government. Conservatives (small c or otherwise) have formed governments and have a larger vote base than the NDP.
Historically, conservatives have more electoral difficulties with the centrist Liberal party.
Buzz aside, I would guess that the large unions look at the Liberals and Conservatives as being cut from the same cloth. |
Walkerpub
Member
Username: Walkerpub
Post Number: 68
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 24.57.42.143
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 12:38 am: | |
On the union conspiracy in Windsor:
If the NDP could get elected through the power of unions in Windsor, how does one explain the long reign of Liberals locally? ie- Herb Gary, more than 35 years.
Guess that union conspiracy theory also 'splains how Dwight Duncan and Sandra Pupatello trounced the NDP at the provincial level.
Here's a thought: our isolated position in Canada means we tend to elect quality politicians in this city- Rick Limoges being the exception in the past few elections. |
Erikto
Member
Username: Erikto
Post Number: 305
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 64.228.108.94
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 3:25 am: | |
I'm not sure how St Catherines voted, but Oshawa (car cpaital of Canada for the moment) went Conservative. I'll bet the London area (always reliably Conservative) has more unionized staff per capita than Parkdale-High Park (NDP). Halton is home of loads of unionized workers who obviously voted Conservative. I don't think unions held much sway in this election. I'm surprised a union hating, card carrying conservative would take a job in a union shop. I suppose everyone has their price and the wages and benefits are probably almost as good as those available to the 'independent contracters' who make up so much of the Canadian work force these days.
What a depressing night Monday was. At least the person I voted for won, although that was a tight back-and-forth race. |
Karl
Member
Username: Karl
Post Number: 932
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 72.25.177.194
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 3:40 am: | |
From today's "Best of the Web Today" by James Taranto:
Worthwhile Canadian Initiative
"Not so long ago," we noted in September, "the Angry Left was exulting in the election victories of anti-American, or at least stridently anti-Bush, candidates in places like Germany, South Korea and Spain." At the time we wrote that, pro-American candidates had won elections in Australia, Britain, the U.S. and Japan. Since then, Germany has switched sides, and now we can even add Canada to the list.
In Monday's elections up there, the Conservative Party defeated the incumbent Liberals. The Conservatives have only a minority government, which means that, as Bloomberg notes:
Some of Harper's other initiatives may get stalled by opposition parties because the Conservatives, unlike the Liberals, have no natural allies in Parliament. These measures include corporate tax cuts, allowing domestic banks to merge under certain conditions, and lifting foreign ownership limits on industries such as telecommunications. His plan to reverse Canada's support for the Kyoto agreement on greenhouse gas emissions may also be blocked.
Still, it's nice to see the good guys win yet another one. |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 136
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 4:01 am: | |
Whether Iran means business or was just bluffing like Saddam is enough to disquiet many European nations. Notice how the elections have been going for admittance into an European alliance. Holland and France and others don't seem to desire open borders as much now than they might have.
Admitting Turkey would be even more upsetting to Europeans now than before. However, the most disturbing realization would occur to the Europeans if and when the US were to abandon the Continent and leave its defense to the Europeans. Right now, they're getting much of a free ride.
Canada too in this respect is like Europe. Somewhat of a parasite. |
Walkerpub
Member
Username: Walkerpub
Post Number: 69
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 216.8.168.158
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 1:05 pm: | |
Calling the Conservatives "good guys"- now there's a stretch. Small wonder the Bush neo-cons love these guys. It's enough to bring a tear to one's eyes remembering the glory days when Brian Mulroney and Ronald Reagan sang "Danny Boy" together.
Wonder what Bush and Harper's theme song will be?
Any suggestions? |
Fastcarsfreedom
Member
Username: Fastcarsfreedom
Post Number: 15
Registered: 11-2005
Posted From: 206.80.245.88
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 7:56 pm: | |
Walker--first off, check your facts, it was actually "When Irish eyes are smiling"--it was St Patricks Day, both leaders were of Irish heritage and were in Quebec City where there is actually a long-standing Irish-descendant community. It has sickened me since then (I was a kid but clearly remember the controversy) that any PM of this country should have to be an apologist for having a close working/personal relationship with the U.S. president. The Reagan-Mulroney relationship was genuine--you need only have watched Brian Mulroney deliver a eulogy at Reagan's funeral to know that. Moreover, why shouldn't these two vitally important economic and strategic allies have a good relationship? Of that era came important and successful initiatives like the original FTA which John Turner and the Liberals staked their election on defeating.
Livernois, I have to call you out on your "parasite" comment, though I understand where it is coming from. Firstly, don't be fooled by the prevailing political opinions that sometimes are emitted by the long-standing left-leaning bureaucracy that wafts from the Canadian federal government vis-a-vis our Foreign Affairs department. The majority of the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces would be happy to do their part in terms of contiental defense if the Department of National Defense had not been starved of approriate funding for so long. We can only hope that the newly elected Conservative government will rise to the occassion of giving the Forces what they deserve. The milque-toast lefties that govern policy from their bueraucratic kingdom in Hull do not speak for all Canadians.
Walker, you'd be surprised to learn that myself, and other Conservatives are not merely blue-eyed lizards cloaked as warm fleshy humans. I don't believe that the left is evil, just wrong. You're free to feel that my opinions are off-base, but really, if you and your fellow believers don't stop this "evil, scary, secret agenda, boogey-man" talk and get back to fighting elections on the issues, I suggest you get used to a life in opposition. |
Karl
Member
Username: Karl
Post Number: 940
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 207.168.116.66
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 11:18 pm: | |
Fastcarsfreedom - I'm speaking from afar (AZ) May I add 2 words to your last sentence "and minority" as has happened in the US. One of the news channels I watch is Fox News, and was very surprised that Canada, up until recently, did not allow Fox to be broadcast over Canadian cable systems. Now that it is (partially?) allowed, the mail coming in from Canada has been fascinating. Between the liberal (one-sided) press and limited opinion on TV, citizens have truly been kept in the dark. It will be most interesting to see, armed with more facts, the actions of the citizenry. You are right, we can all thank Reagan for our vast strong military esp after 9/11. While I understand the comment by Livernois, there have been times but for thinkers like Reagan, the US could be in the same situation. After 9/11, it would appear that what is good for the US is also good for Canada, and we'll ignore the whining of the libs for the moment. It has been, and hopefully will be, a strong and mutually beneficial partnership. |
Fastcarsfreedom
Member
Username: Fastcarsfreedom
Post Number: 16
Registered: 11-2005
Posted From: 206.80.244.44
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 11:41 am: | |
Nice to hear from you Karl--Arizona is a beautiful place. You are correct about Fox News--it is now fully available in Canada, on digital cable and satellite systems. There is not the space for it on old-fashioned analog cable systems. The CRTC, the northern version of the FCC has some fairly onerous laws about the percentage of non-Canadian channels available in relation to domestic content. Generally, it takes a domestic channel to be added to allow additional 'import' channels such as Fox News. No question the liberal powers-that-be made Fox wait unfairly while CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, etc have all be available here for years.
That being said, I back the Canadian Forces for one reason--the human resource. The enlisted men and women make it a great military, in spite of a woeful lack of funding and equipment. It is my sincere hope that the promised/proposed reinvestment in the Forces will come to pass, because it is Canada's duty share in the defense of the continent, and the U.S. ought to be able to feel confident that Canada has the resources to protect itself and indirectly, it's neighbours. It is amazing when you take a issues like this, just how destructive the narrow spectrum of liberalism has been in the past decade. |
Karl
Member
Username: Karl
Post Number: 946
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 207.168.116.66
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 2:01 pm: | |
Well said, Fastcars. It has been an education for me to watch as Fox rolls out up there - the fearmongering from the large newspapers has been pretty eye-opening to say the least. Yet, as we've found here in the US as Fox, conservative talk radio and blogs have all skyrocketed, what folks really want is - and I don't mean to plug Fox but they've gotten it right - "fair & balanced", and "we report, you decide"
The sheople, as some on these threads call them, are not so dumb - they just need enough accurate info to make a decision. And as the liberal left media begins to melt, their ever-more-shrill outbursts are truly a sight to behold.
I'm in Seattle today, so getting a better dose of liberalism and Canadian weather!
Have a great day. |
Fastcarsfreedom
Member
Username: Fastcarsfreedom
Post Number: 17
Registered: 11-2005
Posted From: 206.80.247.91
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 11:48 pm: | |
Couldn't agree more Karl--I post on www.freedominion.ca, which is a terrific (and booming) Canadian conservative forum, if you've never stopped in there, I suggest you have a look. As Fox News rolled out up here, The Fifth Estate, which is a CBC news-magazine, got into a real pissing match with Bill O'Reilly--it was fascinating to see how threatening FNC was to the liberal minds at CBC, whereas there was never a peep about CNN or MSNBC. We are blessed to have had a conservative-minded national paper, The National Post, since 1998, which finally brought some much needed balance to the national print media in this country. Great chatting back-and-forth with you Karl, keep in touch. |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 147
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
| | Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 12:10 am: | |
Listening/watching the over-coverage in the various media about the US military should leave Iraq would lead one to believe that John Lunchbucket wants the US out of Iraq, pronto. But a major poll says otherwise:
57% Americans support military action in Iran - Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll
What might a similar poll taken in Canada yield if the limp-wristed radiclibs there are given their due weight - and nothing more than their actual numbers? |
Erikto
Member
Username: Erikto
Post Number: 306
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 64.228.108.123
| | Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 3:35 pm: | |
Not sure if we have enough frothing-at-the-mouth inbred hicks to balance out the "limp-wristed radiclibs" to make you happy, Livernoisyard. I suppose if we followed Dubya's lead and spent our way into a giant hole of debt for future generations to contemplate, we might not be so "limp-wristed"? Tough guys "spend now and forget about later", I guess. Maybe if more of our jounalists were gay pornographers and pimps asking Stephen Harper easy questions, we'd have some more 'balance' against the limp-wrists. I don't want to start a feud here, but following your "parasite" comment above, I just got this flash of nausea.
If anyone is curious, I highly recommend that Fifth Estate documentary. It pointed out one lie after another from these balanced right wing tv show hosts, and the fact that none of the really popular ones (eg Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh) can handle any rebuttal.Bill O'Reilly's tantrum and physical threat against the son of a WTC victim was something to see. O'Reilly is such a dimwit, he had to recognize his intellectual short-comings and refuse to appear on the tv show. |
Karl
Member
Username: Karl
Post Number: 966
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 207.168.116.66
| | Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 4:05 pm: | |
Ah, I see Erikto has been drinking the KoolAid - expecting perfection from the likes of GWB & OReilly, overlooking the fact that, after studying the issues, GWB & GOP keep winning elections, and out of 100's of cable channels to choose from, OReilly is #1 in that category. Oh well, keep drinking.
To his credit, OReilly uncovered a crapload of left-wing bias in the Canadian media when he (gasp) dared to differ with their views. From their reaction, up to that point they enjoyed their little fiefdom and the control they had over what the people saw/read. Strange how, like Americans, Canadians had the opportunity to see "We report, you decide" in action, and they decided - bigtime - to consider OReilly's viewpoint, then decide for themselves. No more exclusive spoon-feeding by the left wingnuts in Ottawa & Toronto. Now that the genie is out of the bottle, the oldline media in Canada will have the same problem as the old guard in the USA - declining readership, in other words, "I'm melting!" Pity, as they say.
As to your comment about not being able to handle rebuttal, there are more left wingnuts/Dems/libs on OReilly, Limbaugh & Hannity's shows than representation by the GOP/right/cons on lefty places like Air America (have they managed to get themselves shut off yet?)
I apprciate your feigned nausea & whining, Erikto, and esp loved the comment about "inbred hicks". Keep making haughty assumptions like that - it is helping us to win elections. Your right "in-bred hicks" are having more babies than the prone-to-abort left, and they produce a wonderful thing: VOTERS I'll continue to tolerate an occasional mistake by what you refer to as the "inbred" right, while the left continually bungles, bungles, bungles.
It appears that here is the USA, our far left still loves & supports terrorism, atheism, and sodomy. How about yours? |
Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell
Post Number: 2235
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 66.167.58.137
| | Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 4:40 pm: | |
LOL @ the "limp-wristed radiclibs" moniker. Talk about the pot calling the kettle... The only limp-wrists I know are the atta-boy chickenhawks running this country and those running their mouths on right wing media outlets. When it comes to backing up their macho talk the only place you'll find their limp wrists is in their pants or their illegal meds bottles, not serving their country.
With scare tactics by the administration scare-orists there is always a poll bump at the start of the news cycle. It happened with Iraq too, but if you read further in that article, reality bites.
quote:When asked who was winning the war in Iraq, 33% said the United States, 7% said the insurgents, and 55% said neither side was winning.
Americans remain divided over how long U.S. forces should stay in Iraq: 40% believe the United States should remain in Iraq for “as long as it takes,” 36% want U.S. troops withdrawn within a year, and 14% support immediate withdrawal.
I'm no huge fan of the Liberals but at least they didn't follow the fool to the south into the the swamp of Iraq. [As Harper thought they should have.] Instead they have a balanced budget, balance of trade surplus, health care and peace. |
Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell
Post Number: 2237
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 66.167.58.137
| | Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 5:19 pm: | |
LOL @ the "limp-wristed radiclibs" moniker. Talk about the pot calling the kettle... The only limp-wrists I know are the atta-boy chickenhawks running this country and those running their mouths on right wing media outlets. When it comes to backing up their macho talk the only place you'll find their limp wrists is in their pants or their illegal meds bottles, not serving their country.
With scare tactics by the administration scare-orists there is always a poll bump at the start of the news cycle. It happened with Iraq too, but if you read further in that article, reality bites.
quote:When asked who was winning the war in Iraq, 33% said the United States, 7% said the insurgents, and 55% said neither side was winning.
Americans remain divided over how long U.S. forces should stay in Iraq: 40% believe the United States should remain in Iraq for “as long as it takes,” 36% want U.S. troops withdrawn within a year, and 14% support immediate withdrawal.
I'm no huge fan of the Liberals but at least they didn't follow the fool to the south into the the swamp of Iraq. [As Harper thought they should have.] Instead they have a balanced budget, balance of trade surplus, health care and peace. |
Crazy_pete
Member
Username: Crazy_pete
Post Number: 8
Registered: 01-2006
Posted From: 72.138.178.249
| | Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 7:43 pm: | |
Martin also supported Iraq... AT THE TIME... he made several comments in 2003 in support of the the US war, but then changed his mind later once he was in office and declined to send troops
Same thing with Harper... He supported it AT THE TIME, but changed his mind later when all those issues of faulty intelligence came up. |
Fastcarsfreedom
Member
Username: Fastcarsfreedom
Post Number: 18
Registered: 11-2005
Posted From: 206.80.245.19
| | Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 9:09 pm: | |
In regard to the Fifth Estate's "expose" about Fox News--I never understood it. At the time it was produced Fox had not even debuted up here--though it was neatly packaged as some altruistic attempt to expose so-called "lies"--it's true purpose was to discredit Fox prior to it's debut in Canada, where it competes directly with CBC-owned cable news network Newsworld. Prior to Fox turning up the competitve heat in the Canadian cable news market Newsworld still had "Antiques Roadshow" as part of it's schedule. |
Karl
Member
Username: Karl
Post Number: 968
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 207.168.116.66
| | Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 9:52 pm: | |
Now this week we have the book coming out written by the high-ranking Iraqi military official saying that, because Sadaam knew the US was coming, they used 56 scheduled passenger flights with seats removed to move WMD to Syria. No problem though, since all the Dems are on record as saying Sadaam had to go "because of Iraq's WMD's", so Martin & Harper can always hang their hats on that - ah, the left - just wuv 'em! |
Walkerpub
Member
Username: Walkerpub
Post Number: 71
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 24.57.42.143
| | Posted on Saturday, January 28, 2006 - 10:55 pm: | |
Glad to see FastCars and Karl having a lovefest on this board while hijacking it to discuss the war in Iraq. Always the same shiite about the left wing conspiracy in the media. After all Fox is such a model of balanced journalism. Saddam conspiracies continue to run rampant- a real shame they didn't find any WMD- my sources tell me they put them on a flight to Tahiti.
Better than talking about Cheney and Haliburton, the bin Laudens and the Bushes, and why the price of oil is sky high. blah blah blah- heard it all before...
Here's a great site for you neo-cons to enjoy:
http://www.whitehouse.org/
Still no takers on what Bush and Harper will be singing?
How about "Home on the Range." |
Erikto
Member
Username: Erikto
Post Number: 307
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 64.228.108.169
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 2:14 am: | |
I thought 'limp wristed radiclibs' deserved a like-minded retort, and until Livernois qualifies his remarks, I don't feel like qualifying mine.
As for the Fox doc (about Fox, not a fake doc made by Fox), they broadcast a number of instances of O'Reilly citing results from studies undertaken by institutions that don't exist. I mean, the bum couldn't even be bothered to make some hapless intern throw up a few crappy home-pages to suggest the suppliers of O'Reilly's 'information' ever existed! That's not only dishonest, that's one sorry, half assed, insultingly sloppy series of frauds. But don't believe it for a minute Karl, the CBC staff buys their kool-aid at the same store I do... As for Rush, I haven't seen his show in years- he used to sit alone at his desk and make stuff up about Bill Clinton. Another documentary showed Rush in action when he was in front of an audience not pre-screened as ditto-heads, and he had to clear the room! Glad to hear he is now arguing one on one with guests on his show. |
Walkerpub
Member
Username: Walkerpub
Post Number: 72
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 24.57.42.143
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 5:07 am: | |
Heroes of the neo-con media:
Limbaugh- check his prescription.
O'Reilly- gives the Irish a bad name.
Much more fun to watch The Daily Show- at least the left has a sense of humour!
Coming soon: Live: the Harper government excoriates the CBC.
And they call it democracy... |
Karl
Member
Username: Karl
Post Number: 970
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 207.168.116.66
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 2:05 pm: | |
Walkerpub - just keep tossing those verbal barbs. If the left would watch/listen, they could easily form a game plan - but they don't, for the most part. It cracks me up when OReilly has 2 high-ranking Dems on for interviews and the left paints the entire show as "lies, all lies!"
It is obvious when listening to these shows that the hosts have plenty of folks from the left who are alarmed about the way things are going, and feed a treasure-trove of info. Then there are the others, the pompous who parade on to argue silly points. Some are smart enough to realize that their points have never seen the light of day with millions of thinking viewers, but by then it is too late. Others keep coming back for more. Regardless, it is informative and sometimes shocking.
The great thing is that no matter how rich, haughty, intelligent or otherwise well-placed you are in this country, you get one vote. Dimwits or not, most folks have common sense, and simply want a decent life for themselves and their families. The ranting & hysterics of the left are worse for the cause, as it brings attention to things folks might not otherwise have paid attention to. Fair & balanced. We report, you decide.
Nothing wrong with an opinion, Walkerpub - but I hope it is based on looking at the facts on both sides (I am a regular listener to AirAmerica & like the lib balance of Alan Colmes) As the choice in media expands, others can easily see if you are unfairly biased. Your post above, with nary a fact on any issue folks care about, is a great example. |
Erikto
Member
Username: Erikto
Post Number: 308
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 64.228.108.133
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 2:17 pm: | |
Ranting, hysterics, name calling... who'd have thought Karl was such an elegant man, opposed to such tawdry discourse? All because the left "loves and supports terrorism, atheism and sodomy", I guess, to borrow from one of Karl's innumerable fair and balanced evaluations. |
Karl
Member
Username: Karl
Post Number: 972
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 207.168.116.66
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 3:38 pm: | |
Once again, as Erikto illustrates so well, no facts or coherent arguments, just personal attacks. This is why the left will keep losing elections. Ericto, keep up the good work. |
Walkerpub
Member
Username: Walkerpub
Post Number: 74
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 24.57.42.143
| | Posted on Sunday, January 29, 2006 - 5:04 pm: | |
My goodness- a cabal of neo-cons on the Fab Ruins of Detroit- how sweet!
I know you boys like to wander off on tangents, with left-wing conspiracies around every bend (mind you, the left does the same thing to the right ala Michael Moore et al- but at least there's some humour there unlike you morose lot) but let's stick the topic of this thread.
Even with a Liberal government under siege, running a very poor re-election campaign, the Conservatives couldn't muster a majority in Canada. No seats in the three major cities in the country. A weak mandate at best, sure to be followed by another election within two years. They will need the Blockheads to pass bills- this will ultimately be used by the Liberals and NDP against the Tories.
Harper and company have been handed a great opportunity and I for one am happy to let them take their best shot. Ii will certainly be enough if the west west stops bellyaching about being excluded from the feds (hell, they have so much oil money in Alberta, they could probably single-handledly take care of many of our countries' ills- fat chance though!).
Let's see how well Harper can handle the heat now that he is in the kitchen. I am sure the so-called left wing media will be willing to give him a fairly decent honeymoon period. As it should be- we all have enough rhetoric and hubris for the time being.
And throughout all this, my mind takes me back to the end of the Mulroney era.
Remind me again how many seats the Conservatives won that time? By the way, since you boys are so big on facts, don't let them get in the way of a good story.
The Liberals are down but hardly out, unlike the Conservatives who needed to take a big time out after Brian and his gang of crooks were summarily turfed out of office, during one of the most embarassing party meltdowns in recent history.
Interesting how many Liberal cabinet ministers won re-election. Guess it really is about the economy- we are the envy of the western world, with a strong economy and and a great lifestyle.
Quite frankly, I hope the Tories don't fuck it up. |
Fastcarsfreedom
Member
Username: Fastcarsfreedom
Post Number: 19
Registered: 11-2005
Posted From: 206.80.244.50
| | Posted on Monday, January 30, 2006 - 12:28 am: | |
You prove the point I've been trying to make all along Walkerpub, that the voters in the three largest cities in Canada are out-of-touch with the rest of the country, not the other way around. As for the theory that only rural voters support the Conservatives, I point to the fact that Conservative candidates were elected in, and/or around Sarnia, Windsor, London, Kitchener, Hamilton, St. Catherines, Ottawa, etc--and that's just in Ontario. I admire your sense of optimism about the future of the Liberal party, Walkerpub, as deluded as it might be. The only reason there was not a stronger Conservative mandidate is merely the hangover in the electorate's collective mind of all the invented boogey-man scenarios the Liberals threw around in the '04 and '05/'06 campaigns. Not surprisingly, making things up and then running ads saying "we didn't make this up" actually resonates with some voters. Moreover, if you're going to throw around statistics from the 1993, you might want to combine the total seats of PC and Reform, and not flog the dead-horse of the 2 seat total for PC only. Say what you will about Brian Mulroney, history ought to treat him with far more respect than he's been given--and had he sought a third term, the end result of the election in 1993 wouldve been different than the joke of a campaign run by Kim Campbell, et al.
By the way, there is no co-opting or hijacking of this forum to discuss the Iraq War. Iraq is a side-story here, and I enjoy posting on other threads here at DetroitYES, even non-political ones. Iraq has a role to play in the discussion of Canada-US relations in the past five years, that's all I ever said about it. For the record, it isn't only the west that has felt alienated under 12+ years of Liberal rule--there's lots of us here in Ontario and elsewhere that felt ignored for too long also. |
Walkerpub
Member
Username: Walkerpub
Post Number: 75
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 24.57.42.143
| | Posted on Monday, January 30, 2006 - 1:02 am: | |
Talk about hubris:
"I admire your sense of optimism about the future of the Liberal party, Walkerpub, as deluded as it might be. The only reason there was not a stronger Conservative mandidate is merely the hangover in the electorate's collective mind of all the invented boogey-man scenarios the Liberals threw around in the '04 and '05/'06 campaigns."
That is utter nonsense- Harper should have beaten the Liberals in a landslide- "boogeyman" scenario sounds like a pretty lame excuse for coming up short- face it, despite the Tories best efforts, somehow Canadians don't trust Harper- maybe it's his Germanic gaze that grates people and invites comparisons to the Third Reich.
Reality check- the Conservatives barely won a minority. If all you profess is true, then they should've been granted power for the next five years.
Prediction: Frank McKenna becomes leader of the Liberal Party, the Conservatives fall flat as they deal with the reality of governing, and Harper and company go back to the hills of Alberta. |
Fastcarsfreedom
Member
Username: Fastcarsfreedom
Post Number: 20
Registered: 11-2005
Posted From: 206.80.246.10
| | Posted on Monday, January 30, 2006 - 10:19 pm: | |
Germanic gaze? Are you kidding me? You've trampled on every effort to keep this discussion professional and above-board. The answer to the question of why the arguments of people like yourself aren't taken seriously is staring at you in the mirror every morning. Fight on the issues walkerpub--tell us what you believe in, in your soul and in the marrow of your bones. I've known since I was a teenager what I've believed in ideologically, and I've stood on that ground ever since. Blue eyes, my own included, are hardly an indicator of racism or worse--I'm pretty sure even the blue-eyed Paul Martin would agree with me on that one.
As for McKenna--it seems he's bowed out of the game and that his resignation in Washington was motivated by some other curious and unknown factor. John Manley--the one Chretien-era cabinet member I truly had respect for is out of the game too. For all the letters I wrote and emails I sent about the issues over the life of the Liberal government, Manley and/or his office always replied with honesty and candor. Not a single other member of that government I wrote to in dissent ever bothered to do the same, even once. With Manley and McKenna out--the obvious remaining contenders are Brian Tobin, Alan Rock and Turncoat Stronach. Being completely unbiased, Stronach would be a disastrous choice, given her propensity for opportunism. A case could be made for either Tobin or Rock--but both would have a more lengthy period of transition to leadership than someone already sitting. Hard to call that one. Perhaps there are other possible contenders..?
You raise an interesting point when you suggest that the Conservatives SHOULD have won in a landslide--I think that's almost a backhanded compliment--an admission on your part that it was time for Martin's time to end? Seems a strange thing for such a zealot anti-Conservative to say. We agree to disagree on Harper's success as PM--I personally think Canadians in general will be pleased to see new machinery at work in Ottawa, time always tells. |
Walkerpub
Member
Username: Walkerpub
Post Number: 76
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 24.57.42.143
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 10:16 am: | |
The three candidates board an aircraft together heading to their next debate.
Paul Martin turns to Stephen Harper and says I could throw out 10 one hundred dollar bills out of
the plane and easily make 10 people happy.
Stephen Harper says back " I could throw out 100 ten dollar bills and make 100 people happy".
Jack Layton, not to be left out says "I could throw out 1000 one dollar bills and make 1000 people happy".
The airline pilot hears the conversation, leans over to his co-pilot and says "listen to their
arrogance, I could throw all three of them off the plane and make 32 million people happy". |
Goat
Member
Username: Goat
Post Number: 8097
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 64.228.194.73
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 12:36 pm: | |
^^^That...says it all^^^
Thanks Walkerpub, truer words have never been spoken. That made my day. |
Aiw
Member
Username: Aiw
Post Number: 5260
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 209.216.150.127
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 12:41 pm: | |
Fastcars... Mark my words, Tobin WILL NOT run.
I have heard rumors about some behind the scenes ummmm "coupling" that Mrs. Tobin discovered. Brian Tobin was given an ultimatum to leave politcs or get a divorce. He quit.
I doubt seriously that he'll ever be back. |
Fastcarsfreedom
Member
Username: Fastcarsfreedom
Post Number: 21
Registered: 11-2005
Posted From: 206.80.244.252
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 1:45 pm: | |
Ok, so that potentially would take Tobin off the list. From a Conservative standpoint, Stronach or Ignatieff would be a dream--no one seems to have heard from Allan Rock, so perhaps he's still a possibility along with people like Joe Volpe. Interesting to read in the papers today that loyal Liberal-boy McKenna is very critical of the way the Chretien and Martin governments handled Canada-US relations, saying that an acerbic attitude at the top of government did a lot of damage to the relationship--but that that is now "water under the bridge." Seems even he has confidence in the new government to make the necessary overtures to heal the continental coalition. |
Upinottawa
Member
Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 163
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 198.103.184.76
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 1:49 pm: | |
AiW called it: Tobin is out.
Nothing in the article about "coupling", however....
http://www.theglobeandmail.com /servlet/story/RTGAM.20060131. wtobin0131/BNStory/National/ |
Goat
Member
Username: Goat
Post Number: 8104
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 64.228.67.124
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 6:36 pm: | |
Bill Graham is the interim leader of the liberal party until a new leader is elected.
I wonder if Graham will run for teh full gamit? |
Upinottawa
Member
Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 168
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 198.103.184.76
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 7:00 pm: | |
Goat: Bill Graham is in because he won't run for the party leadership. He was on the news the other day saying his wife would not let him run.
That last line is funny (sort of) because Bill Graham is gay (he does, however, have a wife).... |
Goat
Member
Username: Goat
Post Number: 8105
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 64.228.67.124
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 7:10 pm: | |
I never realized that he was gay. I wonder if he would vote for or against same-sex marriage? lol
I think Ignatieff (sp?) may go for it then. Who else is there? Sheila Copps? LMAO!! |
Upinottawa
Member
Username: Upinottawa
Post Number: 170
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 198.103.184.76
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 7:26 pm: | |
He would probably vote for marriage of convenience....
Bob Rae has been mentioned -- although he has plenty of baggage in Ontario. He claims to have changed stripes (like Mr. Harper only in reverse?).
Others include: Stronach, Brison, Ignatieff, and some Chretien era leftovers. |
Erikto
Member
Username: Erikto
Post Number: 310
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 64.228.108.192
| | Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 2:17 am: | |
Wait for it, Justin Trudeau! The Conservatives will tank in the polls shortly before the election, and nominate Ben Mulrooney (in a close contest against Joe Clark's daughter) to go up against Justin. |
Walkerpub
Member
Username: Walkerpub
Post Number: 80
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 24.57.42.143
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 1:04 pm: | |
For our American friends- that would be (from left) Harper, Martin and Layton.
 |
Erikto
Member
Username: Erikto
Post Number: 313
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 64.228.108.58
| | Posted on Monday, February 13, 2006 - 3:15 am: | |
No Gilles DuShemp? |
|
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.