Canada's Parliamentary Crisis

[Edstock]

Would you rather have a cold fish that is competent can do the job properly

Yes, I would. Then the new guy can appoint Stevie to be our ambassador to North Korea.

 

You are paranoid about Quebec. Last go-round, the aboriginals pointed out that their deals are with the government of Canada, and they had no interest in being part of an independent Quebec. Then the Eastern Townships (all the land south of the St. Lawrence) pointed out that they are contiguous with states like Vermont, and they had no desire to be part of an independent Quebec. The separatists freaked, because Quebec would be about 50% of the size it is today.

 

Separatism was relatively moribund until Stevie decided to poke it with a sharp stick, in a move of brilliant tunnel-vision for short-term gain that blew up in his chubby face, because he didn't think he could be vulnerable. A man's got to know his limitations. A competent cold fish will do just fine, thank-you, and be a hell of an improvement on the carp we have.

 

Considering the NDP's roots in the CCF of Saskatchewan, calling them urban only is somewhat parochial, especially considering their presence in provincial politics country-wide and the diverse provinces they have governed.

 

As to plans for the country as a whole, all the national parties have such, not just Stevie's.

[matthewq4b]

Harper wouldn't be much of a politician if he came out against government health care with a minority in the House. I did say basicly the same thing somewhere on this forum a few years back (Left Wing, Socialist, Communist, Treasonous). I guess some others agree. I have been a contributer to the party since it began as The Reform Party.

 

You will soon see how far left Obama is. I have a suspicion that he is behind this coup of the Canadian government. That is the only explanation that I can fathom for the Liberals destroying their credibility. Obama will look bad compared to a fiscally responsible Conservative government in Canada. He wants to take America to the left regardless of the pain. The people have to believe that what he is doing is necessary. If it is not "necessary" also in Canada, then he loses his credibility.

 

 

I'm surprised you would have supported the reform party in the mid eighties when they were a western interest party, the party tag line was The West Wants In, that was in fact coined by Harper. They did not feild any candidates in Eastern Canada until well in to the 1990's. Again more of Trims revsionist history.

 

 

Swing and anouther miss.

 

Matthew

[matthewq4b]

Yes, I would. Then the new guy can appoint Stevie to be our ambassador to North Korea.

 

You are paranoid about Quebec. Last go-round, the aboriginals pointed out that their deals are with the government of Canada, and they had no interest in being part of an independent Quebec. Then the Eastern Townships (all the land south of the St. Lawrence) pointed out that they are contiguous with states like Vermont, and they had no desire to be part of an independent Quebec. The separatists freaked, because Quebec would be about 50% of the size it is today.

 

Separatism was relatively moribund until Stevie decided to poke it with a sharp stick, in a move of brilliant tunnel-vision for short-term gain that blew up in his chubby face, because he didn't think he could be vulnerable. A man's got to know his limitations. A competent cold fish will do just fine, thank-you, and be a hell of an improvement on the carp we have.

 

Considering the NDP's roots in the CCF of Saskatchewan, calling them urban only is somewhat parochial, especially considering their presence in provincial politics country-wide and the diverse provinces they have governed.

 

As to plans for the country as a whole, all the national parties have such, not just Stevie's.

 

 

 

Ed that is what the y want you to believe. Harper has done the exact opposite and made separatism a non issue, as it was in the last to elections.

 

In fact he gave Quebec exactly what they have they have been asking for for ages. Recognition as a Distinct nation-society. He tabled a bill in Nov of 06 that allowed the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada. This Bill was passed in the house with support from all parties. It passed with a vote of 266 to 16 for it. It had unanimous support from t he Bloc A few western Conservatives choose not support it.

 

Harper presents the greatest threat to separatist movement in Quebec since this whole mess began. And Gilles knows it. If the separatists are given what they want recognition as a distinct society (Which they are now allowed to do but have not exercised) The separatists mandate will have been met, and the reasons for the bloc to exist cease.

 

So unlike the what the media reports Harper has put in place the vehicle to allow Quebec to from their own distinct society-nation within Canada. The single biggest demand in the separatists mandate has been met. So tell me how that fanned the flames of the separatists movement ? If any thing it should have diffused the situation .

But the Bloc have chosen to ignore the very avenue they have been asking for and supported, Instead they have chosen to remain in the house and cause disruption. And THEY have in fact fanned the flames of the western separatists movement. A far more dangerous and easily achievable mandate. If Alberta goes the nation is done for. As the country can not survive with the loss of the main revenue generator. The Bloc will not be happy till the tear the nation apart. Unfortunately most eastern Canadians do not see the Bloc for what they actually are.

 

 

The issue here is not Harper but the Bloc. Unfortunately eastern Canadians rarely get the whole story from the media and form judgments based on incomplete information. So explain to me how Harper has fanned the flames of separatism ? Has he done it by working towards an agreeable situation for the Separatists and federalists, something every one supported. So if by agreeing with the separatists that they are a distinct society and meeting some of their main demands does not quell the flames or separatism and is actually fanning them. Then the solution to use the hammer and outlaw the bloc and charge anyone who speaks of separating with treason. :rolleyes:

 

We get lots of Hrper did not do this did that. But when tha facts are presented no one can support the accusations.

 

So tell me how has Harper fanned the flames of separtisim?

 

This one I got to hear.

 

 

And the national NDP party shares nothing with most of the Provincial NDP party's (especially in the west) let alone the old CCF.

The federal NDP party caters to votes in Urban centers bottom line. That is why they do not have high level MP's or advisor's or policy maker form a rural areas. It is also why the bulk of the NDP MP's elected were from Urban ridings.

 

 

Matthew

Edited December 7, 2008 by matthewq4b

[Dale143]

Wow.

When i started this topic it was meant to go in the direction of a possible draft in the U.S.

It didn't take long for it to get drug over to a Canadian discussion did it.

If you go back to the links i posted it was all about Obama an his chief of staff and there proposals for mandatory civil service.I don't mind getting a little side tracked but to go so far as to changing my topic title? Not cool.

[Edstock]

So tell me how has Harper fanned the flames of separtisim?

 

This one I got to hear.

Ecoutez: Stevie's numnutz attempt to take their funding away. Or did you forget, already? Or, maybe you just don't see how clumsy and heavy-handed that was for a minority-Parliament Prime Minister to do. Prior to Stevie, separatism was slowly dying of boredom and irrelevance. Now, it's got a whole new re-charge, thanks to Stevie. Long-term, it's a dead-end, but it didn't need energizing by the hard-of-thinking.

 

Stevie's censorship attempts on movie and broadcast production got great publicity in Quebec, in the run-up to the election, with a devastatingly funny YouTube video of a bunch of narrow-minded Western-anglo Conservatives reviewing a Franophone proposal for a folk festival. Must be all those galas.

it's hysterically funny, and got great play on English blogs like The Galloping Beaver.

 

So, there's predisposition in Quebec to view Stevie with suspicion. It will make Conservative efforts to get seats in Quebec and Eastern Canada all the more difficult.

 

As well, there's a Quebec provincial election that's getting excited over all this, which may have escaped your attention. As I said, long-term, separatism can't fly, but it can make life difficult

 

A man's got to know his limitations. Even Stevie. Find somebody to replace him in, say, about 18 months. Why? Because Stevie has problems delegating authority to make decisions. It's a management-style that keeps creating its own problems, as we have seen. FWIF, Dief had the same problem.

 

It's OK to be a Conservative. It's not OK to be an incompetent Conservative.

 

Right now, Stevie needs to be seen getting it together with the incoming Obama administration, so that Canada's efforts in shoring up the world economy can be co-ordinated with those of the US as 2009 unfolds. So far, Stevie isn't saying much at all.

Edited December 7, 2008 by Edstock

[Trimdingman]

I'm surprised you would have supported the reform party in the mid eighties when they were a western interest party, the party tag line was The West Wants In, that was in fact coined by Harper. They did not feild any candidates in Eastern Canada until well in to the 1990's. Again more of Trims revsionist history.

 

 

Swing and anouther miss.

 

Matthew

 

I joined when it came to Ontario. I still am a card paying member and contributer to the party which now forms the government. I can't see where I went wrong. You must be eating sour grapes.

Edited December 8, 2008 by Trimdingman

[kpc655]

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=e4qG6UIr8z

 

What's this all abooot?

[Trimdingman]

Ecoutez: Stevie's numnutz attempt to take their funding away. Or did you forget, already? Or, maybe you just don't see how clumsy and heavy-handed that was for a minority-Parliament Prime Minister to do. Prior to Stevie, separatism was slowly dying of boredom and irrelevance. Now, it's got a whole new re-charge, thanks to Stevie. Long-term, it's a dead-end, but it didn't need energizing by the hard-of-thinking.

 

Stevie's censorship attempts on movie and broadcast production got great publicity in Quebec, in the run-up to the election, with a devastatingly funny YouTube video of a bunch of narrow-minded Western-anglo Conservatives reviewing a Franophone proposal for a folk festival. Must be all those galas.

it's hysterically funny, and got great play on English blogs like The Galloping Beaver.

 

So, there's predisposition in Quebec to view Stevie with suspicion. It will make Conservative efforts to get seats in Quebec and Eastern Canada all the more difficult.

 

As well, there's a Quebec provincial election that's getting excited over all this, which may have escaped your attention. As I said, long-term, separatism can't fly, but it can make life difficult

 

A man's got to know his limitations. Even Stevie. Find somebody to replace him in, say, about 18 months. Why? Because Stevie has problems delegating authority to make decisions. It's a management-style that keeps creating its own problems, as we have seen. FWIF, Dief had the same problem.

 

It's OK to be a Conservative. It's not OK to be an incompetent Conservative.

 

Right now, Stevie needs to be seen getting it together with the incoming Obama administration, so that Canada's efforts in shoring up the world economy can be co-ordinated with those of the US as 2009 unfolds. So far, Stevie isn't saying much at all.

 

 

How can he get together with the new US administration until it is in place? As for the bailouts, we have to wait and see how much the States puts up and then go maybe 10% to reflect our population. The Liberals are just carping over nothing as they always do. We just had an election. The Conservatives gained a lot of seats, so they have a bigger mandate than they had before. This coup attempt is out of left field. The people don't want it. The polls show that the Conservatives would win a majority if an election were held to-day. We are being forced to have a government that we don't want. That is not Democracy.

Edited December 9, 2008 by Trimdingman

[suv_guy_19]

How can he get together with the new US administration until it is in place? As for the bailouts, we have to wait and see how much the States puts up and then go maybe 10% to reflect our population.

 

 

So we should ignore the fact that we know how much the car makers want along with the fact that we have 20% of production?

[Trimdingman]

So we should ignore the fact that we know how much the car makers want along with the fact that we have 20% of production?

 

The government will do whatever is necessary. How many big three auto assembly plants are there in Quebec? Why would the Bloc care about the auto industry? The CAW gave the boot to the NDP, so they don't care about the auto industry either, unless they are forced to build stupid green cars that nobody wants. What the government needs to do is ease restrictions on automobiles and cut taxes on them. Ford and GM know how to build and market cars. The Liberals don't have a clue about how to do anything except screw up. Give the car companies their freedom and they will do just fine.

Edited December 11, 2008 by Trimdingman

[Chemo Slice]

lol@ canadia

[Edstock]

This coup attempt is out of left field.

Please. It is not a coup. It is not an attempt at one. If you do not understand our parliamentary system, laws and traditions, do some research. The prorogation of Parliament is a lot closer to the concept of coup d'étât. Think of it as a coup attempt out of right field, instead.

[Trimdingman]

Please. It is not a coup. It is not an attempt at one. If you do not understand our parliamentary system, laws and traditions, do some research. The prorogation of Parliament is a lot closer to the concept of coup d'étât. Think of it as a coup attempt out of right field, instead.

 

This coalition was planned before the election without the knowledge of the voters. Once the voters were told, polls give the Conservatives a majority; therefore, when they pass the non-confidence motion, there will be no election. When Hitler took over Germany, the rules were followed, also. Sometimes it is better to have a "cooling off" period. Prorogueing Parliament is a legitimate Prime Ministerial power. Considering present circumstances, it was given wisely. The Liberals had better think long and hard before they pull this off.

Edited December 14, 2008 by Trimdingman

[Edstock]

This coalition was planned before the election without the knowledge of the voters.

Please supply links and information. Otherwise, this is just a brain-fart.

 

Once the voters were told,

Once the voters were told WHAT?

 

Prorogueing Parliament is a legitimate Prime Ministerial power.

No. It is a legitimate use of the power of the Governor General. The PM may only request.

 

The Liberals had better think long and hard before they pull this off.

Yes indeed. It will take intensive planning to organize the work-force to remove all of Stevie's pictures from the PM's office. They can go into the "Success Story" wing of the National Portrait Gallery.

[suv_guy_19]

They can go into the "Success Story" wing of the National Portrait Gallery.

 

 

No, they can't do that, the government already spent almost all of the money that was to be spent on the new gallery....and now they canceled it.

[Trimdingman]

Please supply links and information. Otherwise, this is just a brain-fart.

 

 

Once the voters were told WHAT?

 

 

No. It is a legitimate use of the power of the Governor General. The PM may only request.

 

 

Yes indeed. It will take intensive planning to organize the work-force to remove all of Stevie's pictures from the PM's office. They can go into the "Success Story" wing of the National Portrait Gallery.

 

It is obvious that this coup attempt has been in the works for quite some time. A complex deal like this takes time. The voters were kept in the dark until after the election. After the election, and the facts about the coalition came out, the polls showed that if a new election were held, the Conservative Party would get a majority. The Liberals are not interested in what the people of Canada want. They are only interested in power for themselves any way they can get it. You are one of their useful idiots who would stand on your head if they asked you to. Your logic is non-existent. Your words are about as strong as a fart in a hurricane.

 

Socialist thinking is going the way of the donosaurs. It has been a failure since the Bolchevik revolution. It is like die-hard religious zealouts. They cannot accept the fact that they have been dead wrong all of their lives. Lefty types like yourself are would-be-king bootlickers and are too stupid to even realize it. When you get down and out and go begging your Commie buddies for your handouts, there will be nothing there for you. So long sucker.

 

Now, go ahead and break this up into your moronic segments. Your format is getting as old as your political ideology, and also as boring.

Edited December 15, 2008 by Trimdingman

[Edstock]

after the election, and the facts about the coalition came out,

What are "the facts", and how did they "come out"?

A complex deal like this takes time.

To you, it's complex? OK. Remember the trigger? Stevie decides to take their funding away. He expected them to support his minority government and commit suicide by passing that bill?

 

With that for a trigger, a decent lunch probably got the leadership (who rep the 60% of Canucks who voted non-Stevie) concerned on-side, details to be hashed-out later. That's my guess for how long it took.

[Trimdingman]

What are "the facts", and how did they "come out"?

 

To you, it's complex? OK. Remember the trigger? Stevie decides to take their funding away. He expected them to support his minority government and commit suicide by passing that bill?

 

With that for a trigger, a decent lunch probably got the leadership (who rep the 60% of Canucks who voted non-Stevie) concerned on-side, details to be hashed-out later. That's my guess for how long it took.

 

Okay, I'll re-phrase. After the election, we found out about the coalition. If you do not think that it was arranged prior to the election, then you are deluding yourself. If an election were held to-day, now that the people know about the coalition, the Conservative Party would win a majority, according to the polls. Therefore, either a coalition will happen, or the budget will pass. There will not be an election. The people now want a Conservative majority, but they are not going to get what they want.

 

I can't make myself any more clear. Those are the facts. Maybe you can break it down into small phrases and find some flaw, or get a magnifying glass and find a spelling or punctuation error. If the opposition allows an election, I will eat my words, but I know they won't.

 

If the coalition does materialize, I can see Liberal MPs crossing the floor rather than try to explain their positions to their constituents. The Liberals would not win another election in our lifetimes after selling us out to the separatists.

Edited December 16, 2008 by Trimdingman

[Edstock]

If you do not think that it was arranged prior to the election, then you are deluding yourself.

If you think it was arranged before the latest election, you are deluding yourself, because there was already a minority Stevie government, and the opposition could have done a coalition at any time through the last parliament — but they didn't. Why? Because it hadn't been arranged yet. Capice?

 

If an election were held to-day, now that the people know about the coalition, the Conservative Party would win a majority, according to the polls.

Maybe, maybe not, depends on the polls.

 

Therefore, either a coalition will happen, or the budget will pass. There will not be an election.

That's right.

 

The people now want a Conservative majority

That's your opinion. Currently, 60% of Canadians voted for a non-Stevie solution. Watching Stevie and his brain-dead performance up til now, most of that 60% is probably still voting non-Stevie.

 

I can't make myself any more clear.

Yes, you can, with effort and practice and irritation. Just see how much better you have become in using sequential logic over the past few months. It's not easy, you still descend to personal insults towards me, which is fine, you gotta do what you gotta do, but your level of discourse has improved considerably from the ill-formed rants of previous months.

 

Those are the facts.

No, those are your opinions.

 

Maybe you can break it down into small phrases and find some flaw, or get a magnifying glass and find a spelling or punctuation error. If the opposition allows an election, I will eat my words, but I know they won't.

Of course they're not going for an election, because the 60% non-Stevie people of Canada don't want one, they want a non-Stevie government. Capice?

 

If the coalition does materialize, I can see Liberal MPs crossing the floor rather than try to explain their positions to their constituents. The Liberals would not win another election in our lifetimes after selling us out to the separatists.

You have the ability to see many things; whether thay are hallucinations or not, only time will tell.

[Trimdingman]

If you think it was arranged before the latest election, you are deluding yourself, because there was already a minority Stevie government, and the opposition could have done a coalition at any time through the last parliament — but they didn't. Why? Because it hadn't been arranged yet. Capice?

 

Maybe, maybe not, depends on the polls.

 

That's right.

 

That's your opinion. Currently, 60% of Canadians voted for a non-Stevie solution. Watching Stevie and his brain-dead performance up til now, most of that 60% is probably still voting non-Stevie.

 

Yes, you can, with effort and practice and irritation. Just see how much better you have become in using sequential logic over the past few months. It's not easy, you still descend to personal insults towards me, which is fine, you gotta do what you gotta do, but your level of discourse has improved considerably from the ill-formed rants of previous months.

 

No, those are your opinions.

 

Of course they're not going for an election, because the 60% non-Stevie people of Canada don't want one, they want a non-Stevie government. Capice?

 

You have the ability to see many things; whether thay are hallucinations or not, only time will tell.

 

 

Maybe you don't understand our political system. A party can form a majority with much less than 50% of the popular vote. The polls indicate that if an election were held to-day, the Conservative party would win a majority. The only time that I used personal insults was after reading your moronic "brain fart" cliche one too many times. Who are you to judge my "level of discourse"? I have been holding back on you so as not to drive you off this thread. I have tried to dumb down to your level of comprehension without success. What is your IQ? Using that information, maybe I can tune you in. Mine is 140.

 

 

 

There are a lot of people who sometimes vote Liberal and sometimes vote Conservative. These people, if they voted Liberal this time, would rather see a Conservative government than a hodgepodge of socialists and separatists holding the balance of power over the Liberals. That is why the polls changed after the Liberals came out with this coalition. Under our system, it is "first past the post". In any riding, the Liberals, NDP, and Conservatives could be neck and neck with the fringe parties to the rear. If the Conservatives win by one vote, with a mere 33% say, of the popular vote, they get the seat. It is the other end, the Liberal/NDP swinger fringe who want the coalition. You have the arts-educated intellectual elite silk stocking types and the union/welfare recipient/criminal element sharing that wedge of the political spectrum.

Edited December 21, 2008 by Trimdingman

[Edstock]

Maybe you don't understand our political system. A party can form a majority with much less than 50% of the popular vote.

Too bad it didn't work out for Stevie. With "much less than 50% of the popular vote", he got much less than 50% of the parliamentary seats. The exquisite part about the situation is that Stevie has no choice, he has to play nice, now, no matter how much he hates it. A wonderful learning experience for those with tunnel-vision.

 

Who are you to judge my "level of discourse"?

Merely the reader of your delightful confections. That's who I am, to judge your level of discourse. That also applies to anybody who gazes upon your deliberations.

 

I have been holding back on you so as not to drive you off this thread.

Please don't, as your postings need all the help they can get.

 

I have tried to dumb down to your level of comprehension without success.

That's the problem with the Stevie crowd: don't dumb down, smart up. By condescending to partake at my proletarian level, you are in the vanguard of the oblivious. By smarting up to the level that you say you really operate at = you did say you were dumbing down = the force and power of your logic should be irrefutable.

 

What is your IQ? Using that information, maybe I can tune you in. Mine is 140.

Excellent. Is that metric or Imperial?

 

It is the other end, the Liberal/NDP swinger fringe who want the coalition. You have the arts-educated intellectual elite silk stocking types and the union/welfare recipient/criminal element sharing that wedge of the political spectrum.

That's your opinion, that anybody who votes non-Stevie is part of "the arts-educated intellectual elite silk stocking types and the union/welfare recipient/criminal element". Maybe they're just normal Canadians who don't believe in your Stevie. Capice?

[Trimdingman]

It was the Liberals who got clobbered in the election. Now they are proving what sore losers they are. If an election were held now, the Conservative party would win a majority because the borderline Liberal/Conservatives have now seen the Liberals' true colors. It is only the religiously brainwashed dyed-in-the-wool Liberals who would go along with the coalition just because their masters tell them to. That aparently includes you as well.

 

Union people are primarily Liberal, as the CAW endorsed the Liberal party after Bob Rae, of the NDP refused to bow to them but chose instead to try and get re-elected.

Liberals pander to the unemployed. (They also create them by raising taxes on the "rich.") Chronically unemployed people overwhelmingly vote Liberal.

It was the Liberal party who fought for and won the right to vote for incarcerated criminals. That is because Liberals are soft on crime, so they knew they would get their vote. Virtually all career criminals are Liberal voters. The Mafia are strong Liberal supporters.

Rich folks of inherited wealth are the same as the unemployed, only they have money. They don't know how to do anything, so they try to help the poor to give their useless lives some meaning. They soon discover that there is money to be made in the "poverty industry", especially if they can get involved with the Liberal party or some charity. It is much easier to obtain grant money from a Liberal government. Anyone who would pay $100,000 for a blob of paint on a canvas would also vote Liberal. They assume their "high intellect" by comparing themselves to the poor, while the poor laugh at them while taking their money. They refer to the real intellectuals as "Neanderthals" and avoid debating them because they always lose.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Trimdingman