Stop Possibility of NDP Government
- Thread starter SerengetiGuide
- Start date
Sorry Sushi, but your smear is nothing but hollow BS. Do you really think someone with any bits of brains left would buy this $hit? Very lame and disappointing from you. If you up north leave J.D. in office then I sincerely hope that you and your fishing businesses pay the price you deserve for your short-sightness. Unfortunately we all may pay this high price too but I hope you will suffer because you had a fair chance to change the writing that is already on the walls.
Fish Assassin
Crew Member
So true, Thank You for saying it as I was already wondering what to say and how to word it.
Steelhead S2
Active Member
I ask for the positive Con message and what do I get? Another mud pie. Unsweetened.
Come on Sushi, stop recirculating this lousy propaganda from party HQ and share with us why you support them. Or... maybe Harper won't allow party members to share that info with uncensored members of the public.
Some one please tell me, why should I vote for them again with their disgraceful record? So far the only message on that point in this thread suggests we should vote Con because they are more racist than the NDP. But there must be more to it than that. WTF?
Come on Sushi, stop recirculating this lousy propaganda from party HQ and share with us why you support them. Or... maybe Harper won't allow party members to share that info with uncensored members of the public.
Some one please tell me, why should I vote for them again with their disgraceful record? So far the only message on that point in this thread suggests we should vote Con because they are more racist than the NDP. But there must be more to it than that. WTF?
Fish Assassin
Crew Member
There are none.
Fish Assassin
Crew Member
It can't be disputed. It's a great post.
Steelhead S2
Active Member
I'm with you gunsmith. After so many fought to build and conserve Canada, I am sad to see so many now who call themselves conservative throwing it all away. We used to stand for something in global community. Now we just stand beside it.
Sushihunter
Active Member
Jack Layton’s hidden agenda - Terence Corcoran
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/04/29/terence-corcoran-jack-layton’s-hidden-agenda/
Terence Corcoran: Jack Layton’s hidden agenda
Terence Corcoran Apr 29, 2011 – 8:28 PM ET | Last Updated: Apr 29, 2011 8:35 PM ET
NDP’s hidden constitution opposes profits, backs ‘social ownership’
With the NDP’s public election platform already packed with more than 200 extreme, unworkable, radical and mostly undesirable promises, it might surprise some to learn that Jack Layton’s current power trip packs at lot more baggage under the floorboards.
How much more can there be? They’ve got plans for what amounts to a 10¢-a-litre cap-and-trade tax on gasoline, doubled pension plan contributions, corporate tax increases, plus a long list of plans and schemes to newly regulate pharmaceuticals, banking, oil, food, telecom, railways and many other industries. As for monetary policy, not mentioned in the platform but recently the subject of comment, Mr. Layton says that he wants to maintain an “arm’s length” relationship with the Bank of Canada, although he apparently at the same time intends to jawbone the bank over interest rates and the value of the dollar.
This is all bad enough, but now let’s have a rummage through the baggage rack and under the floorboards. We’re looking for plans Mr. Layton didn’t mention in the platform, long-standing NDP agenda items, ideological positions they don’t talk much about but which underlie everything the party does. Does the NDP have any “hidden agendas”?
The CBC’s Leslie MacKinnon recently reported on the NDP’s official constitution, a 2003 document that specifies why the NDP exists. It turns out the NDP constitution is itself a hidden agenda.
First, here’s a core statement from the preamble outlining the “principles of democratic socialism” that guide the party:
Or does the NDP have a hidden agenda well beyond the fat agenda in the election platform?
That the NDP has larger ideological and political aspirations can be found in the party’s busy legislative effort under Mr. Layton. Most of these bills, not mentioned in the platform, are part of the NDP’s active policy agenda. This is stuff they would do, even if not part of the official election campaign.
Bill C-311 A pet project through the last session of Parliament, and long a part of the NDP agenda. It’s an act to ensure Canada assumes its responsibilities in preventing “dangerous” climate change under United Nations agreements. The word “dangerous” is code for a UN trigger clause that would jumpstart massive global government regulation. Mr. Layton personally backed C-311, a bill loaded with regulatory process and expanded government control over all carbon-generating economic activity. In essence, it would formally lock Canada into following UN-based dictates, even if those dictates were contrary to Canadian interests and even contrary to common sense.
Bill C-502 An act to block oil tankers from entering waters off the British Columbia coast, a move that would prevent the export of oil and gas.
Bill C-337 A union crowd-pleaser that aims to prevent federally regulated industries from hiring replacement workers in the event of a strike. Sounds innocuous, although it would do little more than give unions at airlines, railways and other firms more power and make it more difficult for companies to compete and make profits (see constitution above).
Bill C-469 An Act to establish a Canadian Environmental Bill of Rights would, in practice, bog businesses down in legal and regulatory thickets every time they are seen to be doing some “harm” to the environment.
Other bills make up the hidden agenda list: C-518 would shut down aquaculture; C-474 would move to subject agricultural seeds to review for “potential harm” before “any new genetically modified seed is permitted;” C-298 would impose “corporate social responsibility” on Canadian mining companies operating abroad.
That last bill is also known as the bill to encourage mining companies to set up head offices in other countries — composed, as such companies are, of profit-seeking enterprises currently outside the grasp of NDP “social ownership.”
All the above failed to become law. But the NDP is full of many more such ideas fashioned out of the socialist ideology that’s at the official core of the party’s constitutional agenda, a hidden agenda that it seems voters are not supposed to know about.
Posted in: FP Comment Tags: carbon tax, Jack Layton, Mining, Oil, Terence Corcoran
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/04/29/terence-corcoran-jack-layton’s-hidden-agenda/
Terence Corcoran: Jack Layton’s hidden agenda
Terence Corcoran Apr 29, 2011 – 8:28 PM ET | Last Updated: Apr 29, 2011 8:35 PM ET
NDP’s hidden constitution opposes profits, backs ‘social ownership’
With the NDP’s public election platform already packed with more than 200 extreme, unworkable, radical and mostly undesirable promises, it might surprise some to learn that Jack Layton’s current power trip packs at lot more baggage under the floorboards.
How much more can there be? They’ve got plans for what amounts to a 10¢-a-litre cap-and-trade tax on gasoline, doubled pension plan contributions, corporate tax increases, plus a long list of plans and schemes to newly regulate pharmaceuticals, banking, oil, food, telecom, railways and many other industries. As for monetary policy, not mentioned in the platform but recently the subject of comment, Mr. Layton says that he wants to maintain an “arm’s length” relationship with the Bank of Canada, although he apparently at the same time intends to jawbone the bank over interest rates and the value of the dollar.
This is all bad enough, but now let’s have a rummage through the baggage rack and under the floorboards. We’re looking for plans Mr. Layton didn’t mention in the platform, long-standing NDP agenda items, ideological positions they don’t talk much about but which underlie everything the party does. Does the NDP have any “hidden agendas”?
The CBC’s Leslie MacKinnon recently reported on the NDP’s official constitution, a 2003 document that specifies why the NDP exists. It turns out the NDP constitution is itself a hidden agenda.
First, here’s a core statement from the preamble outlining the “principles of democratic socialism” that guide the party:
- That the production and distribution of goods and services shall be directed to meeting the social and individual needs of people within a sustainable environment and economy and not to the making of profit;
- To modify and control the operations of the monopolistic productive and distributive organizations through economic and social planning. Towards these ends and where necessary, the extension of the principle of social ownership….
- The New Democratic Party is proud to be associated with the democratic socialist parties of the world and to share the struggle for peace, international co-operation and the abolition of poverty.
Or does the NDP have a hidden agenda well beyond the fat agenda in the election platform?
That the NDP has larger ideological and political aspirations can be found in the party’s busy legislative effort under Mr. Layton. Most of these bills, not mentioned in the platform, are part of the NDP’s active policy agenda. This is stuff they would do, even if not part of the official election campaign.
Bill C-311 A pet project through the last session of Parliament, and long a part of the NDP agenda. It’s an act to ensure Canada assumes its responsibilities in preventing “dangerous” climate change under United Nations agreements. The word “dangerous” is code for a UN trigger clause that would jumpstart massive global government regulation. Mr. Layton personally backed C-311, a bill loaded with regulatory process and expanded government control over all carbon-generating economic activity. In essence, it would formally lock Canada into following UN-based dictates, even if those dictates were contrary to Canadian interests and even contrary to common sense.
Bill C-502 An act to block oil tankers from entering waters off the British Columbia coast, a move that would prevent the export of oil and gas.
Bill C-337 A union crowd-pleaser that aims to prevent federally regulated industries from hiring replacement workers in the event of a strike. Sounds innocuous, although it would do little more than give unions at airlines, railways and other firms more power and make it more difficult for companies to compete and make profits (see constitution above).
Bill C-469 An Act to establish a Canadian Environmental Bill of Rights would, in practice, bog businesses down in legal and regulatory thickets every time they are seen to be doing some “harm” to the environment.
Other bills make up the hidden agenda list: C-518 would shut down aquaculture; C-474 would move to subject agricultural seeds to review for “potential harm” before “any new genetically modified seed is permitted;” C-298 would impose “corporate social responsibility” on Canadian mining companies operating abroad.
That last bill is also known as the bill to encourage mining companies to set up head offices in other countries — composed, as such companies are, of profit-seeking enterprises currently outside the grasp of NDP “social ownership.”
All the above failed to become law. But the NDP is full of many more such ideas fashioned out of the socialist ideology that’s at the official core of the party’s constitutional agenda, a hidden agenda that it seems voters are not supposed to know about.
Posted in: FP Comment Tags: carbon tax, Jack Layton, Mining, Oil, Terence Corcoran
Little Hawk
Active Member
With the 'EXTINCTION-CLOCK' for wild Pacific salmon ticking steadily away at 150 or more genetically distinct runs, GONE FOREVER, and absolutely nothing in the gameplan from the Harper government to arrest this terrifying trend, I stand here and yell loud and clear on this Sport Fishing forum - HYPOCRITE! - to all who would sanction a government hell-bent on sending our GREAT FISHES the way of the Passenger Pigeon.
Before I vote, in that last second before I put pencil to paper and make my mark - and I encourage all my fellow sport fishermen to do same - I will pause for one second, then close my eye's and take a long deep breath, then ask myself - what living in British Columbia would be without WILD SALMON?
The good-ship 'Con' is slowly but surely taking us there and me and my little pencil are going to torpedo the peckers!
Before I vote, in that last second before I put pencil to paper and make my mark - and I encourage all my fellow sport fishermen to do same - I will pause for one second, then close my eye's and take a long deep breath, then ask myself - what living in British Columbia would be without WILD SALMON?
The good-ship 'Con' is slowly but surely taking us there and me and my little pencil are going to torpedo the peckers!
Little Hawk
Active Member
As a life-long ardent angler, former Cabinet Minister, lawyer and radio talk-show host, I feel Rafe Mair has a pretty good finger on the pulse of Canadian politics. I read all the stuff he sends me. In the last hours of this election campaign he shares his thoughts and concerns, which very much parallel my own. Please take a moment to read...
RAFE HERE ON THE EVE OF A FEDERAL ELECTION
Please pass this on!
I write this on Saturday with less than two days to do before we vote. As
might be expected from a paper whose editorial chief is a fellow of the
Fraser Institute, the ill named Vancouver Sun, want a Tory majority. So does
the Globe and Mail and I can hardly wait to see the Province's opinion. I
will not be taking their advice.
Elections ought to be about issues (a bit of profundity for you!) and not
about Political Parties. One blog I read urges us not to vote
"strategically" but stay loyal to our party so as to prevent an extension of
the calamities of a minority government.
Let's deal with that for a bit. What's so bad about minority governments?
Most western countries have then and they seem to be doing OK.
The main argument is that "nothing gets done" and that the parliament is
full of catcalling and rude jibes.
Let me pose this proposition - Thank God Harper has been confined to leader
of a minority government! Can you imagine what the bastards would have done
had they be able to do as they pleased?
The noisy lack of discipline in the Commons shouldn't bother us because it's
better to do it there with words rather that with sticks and stones on the
street. For the most part this sort of behaviour speaks to the frustration
of MPs who, because of our "first past the post" system, have virtually
nothing to do with how the country is run.
Imagine yourself an MP in opposition and the majority brings in a budget
that you see as evil. Of course your side has the Rules laying out
privileges of "debate" meaning a few in your party will be allowed to *****
loud and clear in a fight against the preordained government victory. The
same applies to legislation - your side has a limited power to rail against
it and when that time's up, the government votes the bill into law.
Suppose that you're an MP and the same bad buggers are in office but with as
minority. The Finance Minister can no longer say, if just under his breath,
"like it or lump it". You and all other MPs suddenly have the whip hand. No
longer can a minister bring in legislation on the "like it or lump it"
basis.
Now there are ;practical limitations on the power of the minority to stop or
at least slow down the government - no party wants a sudden untimely
election on fiscal grounds if nothing else. But this applies to the
government too.
What does happen is consultation amongst the parties. Surely that's a very
good thing, not evil as the tightly owned, government loving media would
have us believe.
Minority governments can be coalitions yet still, the coalition will readily
split if the larger party tries to ram it up the nearest bodily orifice.
Let's talk about issues. For as long as I can remember (a long time I must
admit) the issues have been healthcare, unemployment, social services, law
and order and such matters. Every election brings those to office who sound
like they are the ones to deal with these matters; they never do it and the
next election is fought on the same grounds with the same speeches and the
same results.
To my admittedly biased eye there are two issues before us that can and
should be dealt with - Energy and its twin, the Environment. What makes
these issues so critical is that unlike the other issues above, something
can be done and the failure to do anything will have immediate and
devastating impacts - and the damage is forever.
We in BC are expected to lie down like lambs and let the big international
wolves "mine" the bitumen in the Tar Sands and send it across this province
and put it in huge tankers who will take it through the most treacherous
waters in the world. These actions are said to be almost "risk free".
In fact a never ending risk is not a risk any more but a certainty waiting
to happen. Worse than that, the bitumen is hugely destructive and all but
impossible to control as we saw last year with Enbridge's spill into the
Kalamazoo River and with the Exxon Valdes. Enbridge has an appalling record
and wants approval to transport their bitumen across over 1000 KMs of our
land crossing more than 1000 rivers and streams then down our hugely
dangerous coast.
The Conservatives, through the mouth of the Prime Minister, have made it
clear that they don't understand the nature of our coast, comparing it to
the East Coast and the Great Lakes. Under a Tory government, the pipeline
and shipping will take place without hindrance - indeed likely with
government assistance.
Harper has already shown his contempt for our native salmon by making a
substantial grant of taxpayer money to Plutonic Power, which is General
Electric in drag and having a half wit as a Fisheries Minister who attends
Farm Fishery conference encouraging them to do even more damage to our wild
salmon.
Mr Ignatieff is opposed to the pipeline and tanker traffic as is Mr Layton,
(as is the Green Party, of course).
You and I are told by the newspapers that we should vote for Mr Harper but
why?
Fiscal expertise?
Harper didn't create our banking system which kept the country from the fate
of so many others - he inherited it. At the same time the Harper Government
racked up the largest deficit in history.
Foreign Affairs where he cost Canada a seat on the UN Security Council?
Health and other social issues? Surely not even the Vancouver and their
bosom buddy, the right wing think tank, the Fraser Institute which has
screamed for even greater cuts in social programs. They haven't the
slightest concern about saving our environment from huge corporate predators
who don't give a fiddler's fart for our salmon, our rivers or our home owned
BC Hydro.
I won't tell you who I'll vote for but it sure as hell won't be the
Conservatives
RAFE HERE ON THE EVE OF A FEDERAL ELECTION
Please pass this on!
I write this on Saturday with less than two days to do before we vote. As
might be expected from a paper whose editorial chief is a fellow of the
Fraser Institute, the ill named Vancouver Sun, want a Tory majority. So does
the Globe and Mail and I can hardly wait to see the Province's opinion. I
will not be taking their advice.
Elections ought to be about issues (a bit of profundity for you!) and not
about Political Parties. One blog I read urges us not to vote
"strategically" but stay loyal to our party so as to prevent an extension of
the calamities of a minority government.
Let's deal with that for a bit. What's so bad about minority governments?
Most western countries have then and they seem to be doing OK.
The main argument is that "nothing gets done" and that the parliament is
full of catcalling and rude jibes.
Let me pose this proposition - Thank God Harper has been confined to leader
of a minority government! Can you imagine what the bastards would have done
had they be able to do as they pleased?
The noisy lack of discipline in the Commons shouldn't bother us because it's
better to do it there with words rather that with sticks and stones on the
street. For the most part this sort of behaviour speaks to the frustration
of MPs who, because of our "first past the post" system, have virtually
nothing to do with how the country is run.
Imagine yourself an MP in opposition and the majority brings in a budget
that you see as evil. Of course your side has the Rules laying out
privileges of "debate" meaning a few in your party will be allowed to *****
loud and clear in a fight against the preordained government victory. The
same applies to legislation - your side has a limited power to rail against
it and when that time's up, the government votes the bill into law.
Suppose that you're an MP and the same bad buggers are in office but with as
minority. The Finance Minister can no longer say, if just under his breath,
"like it or lump it". You and all other MPs suddenly have the whip hand. No
longer can a minister bring in legislation on the "like it or lump it"
basis.
Now there are ;practical limitations on the power of the minority to stop or
at least slow down the government - no party wants a sudden untimely
election on fiscal grounds if nothing else. But this applies to the
government too.
What does happen is consultation amongst the parties. Surely that's a very
good thing, not evil as the tightly owned, government loving media would
have us believe.
Minority governments can be coalitions yet still, the coalition will readily
split if the larger party tries to ram it up the nearest bodily orifice.
Let's talk about issues. For as long as I can remember (a long time I must
admit) the issues have been healthcare, unemployment, social services, law
and order and such matters. Every election brings those to office who sound
like they are the ones to deal with these matters; they never do it and the
next election is fought on the same grounds with the same speeches and the
same results.
To my admittedly biased eye there are two issues before us that can and
should be dealt with - Energy and its twin, the Environment. What makes
these issues so critical is that unlike the other issues above, something
can be done and the failure to do anything will have immediate and
devastating impacts - and the damage is forever.
We in BC are expected to lie down like lambs and let the big international
wolves "mine" the bitumen in the Tar Sands and send it across this province
and put it in huge tankers who will take it through the most treacherous
waters in the world. These actions are said to be almost "risk free".
In fact a never ending risk is not a risk any more but a certainty waiting
to happen. Worse than that, the bitumen is hugely destructive and all but
impossible to control as we saw last year with Enbridge's spill into the
Kalamazoo River and with the Exxon Valdes. Enbridge has an appalling record
and wants approval to transport their bitumen across over 1000 KMs of our
land crossing more than 1000 rivers and streams then down our hugely
dangerous coast.
The Conservatives, through the mouth of the Prime Minister, have made it
clear that they don't understand the nature of our coast, comparing it to
the East Coast and the Great Lakes. Under a Tory government, the pipeline
and shipping will take place without hindrance - indeed likely with
government assistance.
Harper has already shown his contempt for our native salmon by making a
substantial grant of taxpayer money to Plutonic Power, which is General
Electric in drag and having a half wit as a Fisheries Minister who attends
Farm Fishery conference encouraging them to do even more damage to our wild
salmon.
Mr Ignatieff is opposed to the pipeline and tanker traffic as is Mr Layton,
(as is the Green Party, of course).
You and I are told by the newspapers that we should vote for Mr Harper but
why?
Fiscal expertise?
Harper didn't create our banking system which kept the country from the fate
of so many others - he inherited it. At the same time the Harper Government
racked up the largest deficit in history.
Foreign Affairs where he cost Canada a seat on the UN Security Council?
Health and other social issues? Surely not even the Vancouver and their
bosom buddy, the right wing think tank, the Fraser Institute which has
screamed for even greater cuts in social programs. They haven't the
slightest concern about saving our environment from huge corporate predators
who don't give a fiddler's fart for our salmon, our rivers or our home owned
BC Hydro.
I won't tell you who I'll vote for but it sure as hell won't be the
Conservatives
Little Hawk
Active Member
LM: Where in my post did I say it all happened on Harpers' watch?
Your whole post alludes exactly to that opinion.
" HYPOCRITE! - to all who would sanction a government hell-bent on sending our GREAT FISHES the way of the Passenger Pigeon."
"The good-ship 'Con' is slowly but surely taking us there and me and my little pencil are going to torpedo the peckers!"
There are just too many other issues at stake in Canada to let either the Cons/Ndp/Libs win a majority!!!!
Best scenario, IMHO, is a Conservative MINORITY, hell even an NDP MINORITY!!!!!
" HYPOCRITE! - to all who would sanction a government hell-bent on sending our GREAT FISHES the way of the Passenger Pigeon."
"The good-ship 'Con' is slowly but surely taking us there and me and my little pencil are going to torpedo the peckers!"
There are just too many other issues at stake in Canada to let either the Cons/Ndp/Libs win a majority!!!!
Best scenario, IMHO, is a Conservative MINORITY, hell even an NDP MINORITY!!!!!
Bassblaster
Active Member
This is so freakin' sad.
In order to save west coast fisheries we need to make sure we get rid of Duncan and vote against the conservatives. But then those on here that are Con supporters point out how bad things will be if we have a liberal or NDP government which most of us also agree with.
This would be a simple matter of voting NDP here, if the rest of Canada were to vote Con. But it's apparent that there must be issues with what the conservatives are doing in other ridings as well because that is the only way that there would be a risk of an NDP government federally and Layton getting into power. You don't get voted out of office by your constituents if you are doing a good job, and since we don't get to cast two votes, one for the guy that will do the best job locally, and one for who makes a better leader federally, we end up getting the shaft no matter what we do.
So if the conservatives lose this election they will only have themselves to blame. It's apparent that we aren't the only region of the country that has issues with what they are doing outside our back door. As for voter confidence, well, what the hell is that? We sure don't have any here.
Layton has gained the respect of many canadians for the simple reason he shows up for work while Harper and Ignatieff have better things to do than be part of running the country. Nobody told those guys not to be there, they made those decisions on their own. So Layton is going to get votes just based on the fact that at least it looks from the outside, that he actually wants to run the country. Sad to say that this is all it takes to sway the votes of the sheep called the Canadian public.
And no disrespect to you Sushi as you seem to be a very well informed and connected individual, but all of your arguments against the issue of the Gun control issue are full of Sh#t. Yes the Liberals passed the gun bill in parliament and gave us this bullsh#t registration system, but it was the Conservative government under the leadership of Kim Campbell that originally created C-17 and drafted and proposed the entire registration and firearms act. As soon as Campbell got kicked out the Liberals picked up the ball and rammed it through parliament. I still have both my interview notes and the copies of the magazine we published with the interview with Campbell regarding the issue so stop blowing smoke up our asses.
Now that the registry is in place and has proven to be a total waste of money the conservatives are all over trying to get rid of it because they hope to get the rural vote by doing so. Had Campbell managed to stay in power it would have been the conservatives that would have pushed through the gun bill, not the liberals. It is all just another smoke screen to get votes. And just so no-body gets the idea that this thing is going away, no matter what anyone says politically, IT IS THE LONG TERM PLAN OF ALL THREE POLITICAL PARTIES TO ELIMINATE THE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF FIREARMS IN THIS COUNTRY! The registry will NEVER be voted out. It will always lose by a couple of votes so that it appears to the general public that an effort is being made.
We all know that in this election our votes are wasted based on the leaders of the parties. They are all losers due to past record of performance, party policy, or personal stupidity. But the bottom line is we have to vote for someone, and like it or not, one of them is getting in.
My prediction is that the Con's will once again hold the winning seat with the NDP being the formal opposition and forming a very strong one by joining forces with the Liberals and Bloc. This would effectively place the country in a holding pattern politically as the Conservatives won't be able to get anything accomplished because they'll constantly be getting out-voted on the floor but at least they'll be held in check from giving away more of the country to the rich and big corporations. But if the rest of the country is as pissed off with their local Conservative official as we seem to be, Then there will be no-one to save us from the alternatives.
Like Holmes said, It's the first time we are going to the polls to vote AGAINST someone, rather than for them.
In order to save west coast fisheries we need to make sure we get rid of Duncan and vote against the conservatives. But then those on here that are Con supporters point out how bad things will be if we have a liberal or NDP government which most of us also agree with.
This would be a simple matter of voting NDP here, if the rest of Canada were to vote Con. But it's apparent that there must be issues with what the conservatives are doing in other ridings as well because that is the only way that there would be a risk of an NDP government federally and Layton getting into power. You don't get voted out of office by your constituents if you are doing a good job, and since we don't get to cast two votes, one for the guy that will do the best job locally, and one for who makes a better leader federally, we end up getting the shaft no matter what we do.
So if the conservatives lose this election they will only have themselves to blame. It's apparent that we aren't the only region of the country that has issues with what they are doing outside our back door. As for voter confidence, well, what the hell is that? We sure don't have any here.
Layton has gained the respect of many canadians for the simple reason he shows up for work while Harper and Ignatieff have better things to do than be part of running the country. Nobody told those guys not to be there, they made those decisions on their own. So Layton is going to get votes just based on the fact that at least it looks from the outside, that he actually wants to run the country. Sad to say that this is all it takes to sway the votes of the sheep called the Canadian public.
And no disrespect to you Sushi as you seem to be a very well informed and connected individual, but all of your arguments against the issue of the Gun control issue are full of Sh#t. Yes the Liberals passed the gun bill in parliament and gave us this bullsh#t registration system, but it was the Conservative government under the leadership of Kim Campbell that originally created C-17 and drafted and proposed the entire registration and firearms act. As soon as Campbell got kicked out the Liberals picked up the ball and rammed it through parliament. I still have both my interview notes and the copies of the magazine we published with the interview with Campbell regarding the issue so stop blowing smoke up our asses.
Now that the registry is in place and has proven to be a total waste of money the conservatives are all over trying to get rid of it because they hope to get the rural vote by doing so. Had Campbell managed to stay in power it would have been the conservatives that would have pushed through the gun bill, not the liberals. It is all just another smoke screen to get votes. And just so no-body gets the idea that this thing is going away, no matter what anyone says politically, IT IS THE LONG TERM PLAN OF ALL THREE POLITICAL PARTIES TO ELIMINATE THE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF FIREARMS IN THIS COUNTRY! The registry will NEVER be voted out. It will always lose by a couple of votes so that it appears to the general public that an effort is being made.
We all know that in this election our votes are wasted based on the leaders of the parties. They are all losers due to past record of performance, party policy, or personal stupidity. But the bottom line is we have to vote for someone, and like it or not, one of them is getting in.
My prediction is that the Con's will once again hold the winning seat with the NDP being the formal opposition and forming a very strong one by joining forces with the Liberals and Bloc. This would effectively place the country in a holding pattern politically as the Conservatives won't be able to get anything accomplished because they'll constantly be getting out-voted on the floor but at least they'll be held in check from giving away more of the country to the rich and big corporations. But if the rest of the country is as pissed off with their local Conservative official as we seem to be, Then there will be no-one to save us from the alternatives.
Like Holmes said, It's the first time we are going to the polls to vote AGAINST someone, rather than for them.
Steelhead S2
Active Member
Well Sushi, I read your latest post. And, unless your name is Terence Corcoran, then you have once again failed to express your own positive reasons for supporting a Con. So I ask again, why do you support them, what do you identify with in their platform, and how does that square with their record?
So far all I can do is draw inference from these articles you keep circulating. From the most recent I infer that the Cons are opposed to international cooperation, opposed to the relief of poverty, opposed to peace. They favour monopoly capitalism, and therefore oppose a free market economy. They oppose the regulation of Canadian mining companies, and therefore favour such despicable practices as hiring mercenaries to murder local indigenous peoples who seek a piece of the economic exploitation taking place in their own lands. They want to see oil tankers plying the narrow and dangerous waters of the BC north coast. They oppose environmental regulation. They are against the regulation of fish farms. They oppose the regulation of GMO seeds. And They oppose labour peace.
I don't see much in those policies that appeals to me, or to most Canadians. And I still don't see anything positive or optimistic. It seems to be all about servicing giant capital and isolating Canada internationally. What about small business? What about families and communities? What about future generations? What about respect and transparency? Anything?
And Blaster, what an insightful and cogent post!
So far all I can do is draw inference from these articles you keep circulating. From the most recent I infer that the Cons are opposed to international cooperation, opposed to the relief of poverty, opposed to peace. They favour monopoly capitalism, and therefore oppose a free market economy. They oppose the regulation of Canadian mining companies, and therefore favour such despicable practices as hiring mercenaries to murder local indigenous peoples who seek a piece of the economic exploitation taking place in their own lands. They want to see oil tankers plying the narrow and dangerous waters of the BC north coast. They oppose environmental regulation. They are against the regulation of fish farms. They oppose the regulation of GMO seeds. And They oppose labour peace.
I don't see much in those policies that appeals to me, or to most Canadians. And I still don't see anything positive or optimistic. It seems to be all about servicing giant capital and isolating Canada internationally. What about small business? What about families and communities? What about future generations? What about respect and transparency? Anything?
And Blaster, what an insightful and cogent post!
Last edited by a moderator:
lorneparker1
Banned
what were the postives the ndp did for BC when they were in power provincially? Fast Cast ferries has got a be one forsure!
Sitkaspruce
Well-Known Member
I am not one to play in the political game as I will admit I am not "UP" on what is always going on. However, this time around, I have been reading, asking questions and talking to others about the different candidates and parties that I will be casting my vote for on Monday.
I am really torn as to what to do, I am going to really, for the first time in a long time, think about what the future holds for not only me, but my kids and so on down the road. I absolutely have no use for Duncan, as he has done nothing for the people of the North Island, but I also have no use for the NDP and Libs. Hell I really have no use for any party that deep down, really only cares about themselves and their buddies. Face it, most of us that live in rural communities will always get the short end of the stick, no matter who promises what. The proposed NDP carbon tax will really hurt the rural, as we have no access to alternative means of transportation, the proposed Family daycare initiative by the Libs will never help the rural as we are just not big enough to see an help and the list goes on for all parties. The other day, I got a letter in the mail from my union telling me to vote NDP. The letter also went on to tell me why I should vote NDP, but not one word was about what the NDP will do for me, it was all about thrashing the Cons and what they have NOT done for me as a union member. Typical union BS!!!!
It is funny how different people vote, based on what they perceive to be important topics. Here on the this site, it is a tie between the Cons and NDP, and I bet the NDP have their votes mainly on the issue of fish and a certain guy named Duncan. Over on the BC Hunting site, it is a Conservative landslide, mainly because of the gun registration fiasco.
So today, I will think about what the future holds with respect to me, my family, my riding and my great country and hopefully tomorrow I do not go in and put an extra box on the ballet and put down Mickey Mouse.
Cheers
SS
I am really torn as to what to do, I am going to really, for the first time in a long time, think about what the future holds for not only me, but my kids and so on down the road. I absolutely have no use for Duncan, as he has done nothing for the people of the North Island, but I also have no use for the NDP and Libs. Hell I really have no use for any party that deep down, really only cares about themselves and their buddies. Face it, most of us that live in rural communities will always get the short end of the stick, no matter who promises what. The proposed NDP carbon tax will really hurt the rural, as we have no access to alternative means of transportation, the proposed Family daycare initiative by the Libs will never help the rural as we are just not big enough to see an help and the list goes on for all parties. The other day, I got a letter in the mail from my union telling me to vote NDP. The letter also went on to tell me why I should vote NDP, but not one word was about what the NDP will do for me, it was all about thrashing the Cons and what they have NOT done for me as a union member. Typical union BS!!!!
It is funny how different people vote, based on what they perceive to be important topics. Here on the this site, it is a tie between the Cons and NDP, and I bet the NDP have their votes mainly on the issue of fish and a certain guy named Duncan. Over on the BC Hunting site, it is a Conservative landslide, mainly because of the gun registration fiasco.
So today, I will think about what the future holds with respect to me, my family, my riding and my great country and hopefully tomorrow I do not go in and put an extra box on the ballet and put down Mickey Mouse.
Cheers
SS
Similar threads
