Government of Canada falls!
- Thread starter HCGLNS
- Start date
- Status
BZZT, wrong answer. There's a huge difference between a political merger (Reform and Conservative Party) prior to an election and a tenuous coalition built after an election.
Vote for your leaders? Perish the thought!
I meant that each party have candidates for PM as well... I mean, what if your party that you support has a bonehead leader (which sadly is pretty much all of them right now).
Hell, I can't vote for the Premier in provincial politics either... stupid Ed Stelmach *shakes fist*
I agree with Adammon here wholeheartedly.
The saddest part of the Canadian electoral scene, is that people don't recognize that we do vote for our leaders. Which brings me to my habitual election rant or musing; the elimination of yellow dogs.
Every pollster or journalist is right now pounding the pavement, phonelines and twitterverse to determine, who are you voting for this May. Yet nobody is asking who you are voting for in the election, they are asking what party or leader you are supporting. The person on the ballot is irrelevant to them.
Well it isn't irrelevant to me and nor should it be to you. Three hundred and eight people will be sent to represent you in May, zero political parties will sent. The candidate you have selected may be a member of an official party and pledge their vote to them before the election, but it is the person that will be elected. And the great reward for voting, is that you get the candidate you voted for in the election. If you choose to vote based solely by party lines, you run the significant risk of getting a representative that does nothing more than fill a seat in parliament and sits or stands when instructed. That's not a person representing you, its a dog performing a trick for it's master, and your riding will suffer for it.
So once again, I encourage everyone to get to know the candidates in their riding, cut through the rhetoric of their party's mantras and determine which person will best represent your riding on the national stage.
If you don't, well I hope whoever you elect is a good enough dog to get tossed a bone.
Help Help, I'm being repressed!
See the violence inherent in the system!
See the violence inherent in the system!
If you've driven through Hanna, AB (where they're from), you'd make crappy music too. Anything to get out of there.
Apologies to people from Hanna, but it really doesn't look like much at all. I was glad I was stopping for no more than Subway and kept driving.
Well we've finished 1 week of campaigning with 4 more left to go! Lets review where each Party stands.
CPC - Holding strong with their chauvinistic membership, losing some of the newly gained ground in Ontario and Quebec but still strongly in the minority government department. Repeatedly dogged by controversies but not showing any significant affects of them.
LIB - Making gains in Ontario and Quebec but not anywhere near the numbers to form the government yet. Ignatieff is making huge gains as a leader and growing in respect in each area he visits.
NPD - Surprisingly falling quite flat, losing ground to the Liberals all over Canada. None of their message is resounding in the news or with the voters.
Greens - No real significant impact. Wrapped up in the debate non-controversy and not promoting any significant agenda.
BQ - Well, staying strong in Quebec at the conservatives expense, will most likely remain strong enough to be the party with the 3rd most seats.
Overall I am struck by three unique things;
The success of the Conservative Party at surviving scandals that should shake Canadian voters to their core.
The free fall of Layton and the NDP.
The bickering of news media against each other.
CPC - Holding strong with their chauvinistic membership, losing some of the newly gained ground in Ontario and Quebec but still strongly in the minority government department. Repeatedly dogged by controversies but not showing any significant affects of them.
LIB - Making gains in Ontario and Quebec but not anywhere near the numbers to form the government yet. Ignatieff is making huge gains as a leader and growing in respect in each area he visits.
NPD - Surprisingly falling quite flat, losing ground to the Liberals all over Canada. None of their message is resounding in the news or with the voters.
Greens - No real significant impact. Wrapped up in the debate non-controversy and not promoting any significant agenda.
BQ - Well, staying strong in Quebec at the conservatives expense, will most likely remain strong enough to be the party with the 3rd most seats.
Overall I am struck by three unique things;
The success of the Conservative Party at surviving scandals that should shake Canadian voters to their core.
The free fall of Layton and the NDP.
The bickering of news media against each other.
Well the CPC
- Is the first party in the history of Canada ever charged with election fraud.
- The first government in the history ever convicted of contempt of parliament.
- They declared themselves hard on human smuggling while required refugees to pay their debts to the smugglers before being allowed out of detention cells.
- All stated costs relating to new fighter jets have been shown to not what the government has stated.
- They PMO hired a convicted felon despite regular rigorous RCMP screening.
- Has just today tossed a pair of school girls out of an event for having a picture of Ignatieff on their facebook accounts.
- Refused entrance to an event in Halifax for a social worker who's sole mission is to help feed and clothe homeless veterans.
- Limiting the press to four pre-approved questions per day.
1) Back in 2006 when this 'election fraud' happened, the penalties for the people responsible were a fine of $1000. The practice was common for both the NDP and the Liberals but the Conservatives changed the law and got busted by it. Holy crap, core-rattling.
2) They were held (not convicted) of contempt of parliament by a committee made up of the opposition. That's a little ridiculous to hang your hat on.
3) Seriously? That's core-rattling?
4) The planes that the Liberty party spent $247 million dollars on signing us up for? Those planes? The planes that we tried to pay for earlier but were told was too expensive then - and got more expensive? The planes that would have been cheaper had the multinational cooperation who developed the planes hadn't dropped out of due to political pressure? The planes that are replacing planes that are currently considered "Too dangerous to fly"? Those planes? Just trying to clarify here.
5) The guy was convicted of fraud 24 years ago! This came up 4 years ago after he moved over from the Liberal party. AND he no longer works for the PMO!
6) Seriously? That's core-rattling?
7) Seriously? That's core-rattling?
8) Seriously? That annoys me, but considering the fact that the two stories above are what come out of the press, I can't say I'm too surprised.
Are you saying you are not OK with the purchase of the planes but are OK with the government lying about the costs of the planes?
Are you saying that forcing refugees to pay their way out of jail is a good practice in Canada?
Are you saying that the three findings of contempt by the Speaker against this government are unjustified?
Are you saying that forcing refugees to pay their way out of jail is a good practice in Canada?
Are you saying that the three findings of contempt by the Speaker against this government are unjustified?
The comparisons on costs are based on comparing apples and oranges. Yes the F-35 costs a lot of money. No it doesn't cost as much as the analysts are saying because we're not getting the VTOL component of the F-35. The VTOL that's not working correctly right now and the VTOL that costs an extra load of money. It's like buying a car. You can buy the premium package or you can buy the basic package.
The rule is in place to prevent the immigrant from going underground to pay their debts. If they are no longer beholden to the smugglers, they can integrate better into Canada. And, they're not staying in maximum security jail, they're in a secured compound. If you had a problem with this law, you should have said something about it when it was passed back in 2001 by, you guessed it, Jean Chretien's Liberal majority.
Seeing as the 'contempt' charge came about because of the F-35 cost 'overruns', what do you think my opinion on it is?
The three contempt charges stem from the refusal to reveal to parliament documents regarding Aghanistan prisoners, the attempt to mislead parliament over the post signature modifications of documents by Bev Oda and the refusal to provide documentation to support the new law and order measures. So I think that you are either not interested in discussing how contempt of parliament matters to Canadians or did not understand my question as originally proposed.
A little bit of column A and a little bit of column B. Mostly column A. I prefer discussing it with people who are actually aware of the facts and aren't just stomping their feet crying "Bush-lite!, Bush-lite!"
Added at: 20:52
Just to clarify a little more:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-in-historic-commons-showdown/article1956416/
This week, the opposition-dominated procedure and House affairs committee found the government to be in contempt for failing to release information related to the costs of crime legislation and the purchase of stealth fighter jets.
So you can fuck right off.
Hey, one more!
http://www.660news.com/news/local/article/200482--harper-government-found-in-contempt-of-parliament
The Commons committee passed a 12-page report finding the Harper government in contempt for it's refusal to fully disclose the cost of its tough-on-crime agenda, corporate tax cuts and plans to purchase stealth fighter jets.
Well three things spring to mind;
1. I like Harper and think he is nothing like George Bush.
2. I am surprised that you resulted to vulgarity.
3. Have yourself a read of the actual motion of contempt, it lists "corporate profits and taxes and the costs of various justice bills." as the sources of contempt.
1. I like Harper and think he is nothing like George Bush.
2. I am surprised that you resulted to vulgarity.
3. Have yourself a read of the actual motion of contempt, it lists "corporate profits and taxes and the costs of various justice bills." as the sources of contempt.
I find it hilarious and telling of the times that the media is barely reporting on the Liberal and NDP Campaigns. Online I can find plenty, but looking through the papers its all Conservative matters, even though the Liberals actually outlined a very specific platform as opposed to the Conservatives "in 2015 (if we get re-elected again and the budget allows for it after we give out all the corporate tax breaks) we'll give families a tax break. Maybe, possibly. We'll see what Santa can do"
So you like Harper, just not the parties 'chauvinistic membership' and you're surprised by a 'fuck off'? Remarkable!
But you said earlier that the three contempt charges were around the refusal to reveal to parliament documents regarding Aghanistan prisoners, the attempt to mislead parliament over the post signature modifications of documents by Bev Oda and the refusal to provide documentation to support the new law and order measures.
So, once again, I prefer discussing it with people who are actually aware of the facts.
I don't think its that shocking. I think a lot of NDP supporters are jumping ship to the liberal camp, believing that anyone is better than the Conservatives, and recognizing that the Liberals are still the best bet for a left leaning government. Its been happening every year since the Conservatives got into power, really. I had to laugh after the last election, when the NDP brought in less votes than the Bloc and Layton held a press conference boasting about their victory. Nothing gets that man down, it seems.
I'm going to put this here, just cause if I make its own thread, nobody's going to see it anyway, and it is tenuously related:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...nt-confirm-belief-in-evolution/article320476/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...nt-confirm-belief-in-evolution/article320476/
Doesn't really hide the insulting intention of the post though, does it? But carry on.
Added at: 22:08
Ugh, what an idiot.
Really, this election was totally unnecessary. There's nothing earth shaking going on... and I agree with Adammon's analysis of those points listed against the conservatives. There's just no damn reason for an election. I think HCGLNS is right in that overall, the conservatives seats will stay fairly stable and the liberals will make some big gains at the NDP's expense. As for the Bloc... they are still have a strong presence but as a one province federal party they are doomed to slowly die out over generations.
Seriously... why are we wasting money on this election? *facepalm*
Seriously... why are we wasting money on this election? *facepalm*
That guy is a grade A dunce.
I can understand why people find evolution a trickier issue than, say, gravity or plate tectonics (as the article compares it to), especially in view of some strong religious convictions. And truthfully, I don't need him to believe in evolution, so long as he can remove his bias and treat the sciences well, even if they study a field he disagrees with/doesn't believe in. I can't say I know enough to say he is or isn't doing that, but I can understand why he might not want to answer, "no" and be perceived automatically as an enemy of science...
- Status