Canadian Conservative Party Supporters

Drowned Out

polaris_x wrote:

actually ... when i talked to reborn - he wasn't a diehard conservative ... the thing with conservative voters is that their base is interested in several things:

1. lower taxes
2. more individual freedoms (unless you are gay or an immigrant)

everything else are like clouds in the sky ... eventually they clear up ... as long as the Conservatives are the lone right wing voice and continue to launch a negative fear based campaing - they will not lose their voter base ...

Really? I’ve not talked to him much by PM or anything, but judging by his posts on the board, I always thought he was pretty firmly entrenched a little right of centre….maybe he just likes to argue

I think youre bang-on in your description of a typical Con supporter.

bytterman wrote:

Imagine a Canadian Palin...unabashed and ill-informed hubris collides headlong with 'oh, I'm sorry I didn't mean to offend'...armies of psychologists would be employed for years.

hilarious!

lukin2006 wrote:

A vote for any of the mainstream parties is just a vote for corruption.

I agree. Curious if you consider the NDP mainstream?

lukin2006

Yes I consider the NDP mainstream, the Green Party could be considered mainstream as well, they got a million votes last election. And was May not going to except a senate seat if a coalition was formed after 2008? If so this makes them corrupt. I'm tired oh hearing the parties are going to do for us when do not even really know how much revenue they. All these promise's just lead to lies, yet people vote for these parties thinking they will fulfill their promise's. All these election platforms need to be given to an independant accounting firm. Very much doubt any platform will add up.

polaris_x

Drowned Out wrote:

Really? I’ve not talked to him much by PM or anything, but judging by his posts on the board, I always thought he was pretty firmly entrenched a little right of centre….maybe he just likes to argue

yeah ... he has some left-sensibilities in him ... he was definitely pro-israel for the longest time ... we convinced to be more neutral ... haha

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

Yes I consider the NDP mainstream, the Green Party could be considered mainstream as well, they got a million votes last election. And was May not going to except a senate seat if a coalition was formed after 2008? If so this makes them corrupt. I'm tired oh hearing the parties are going to do for us when do not even really know how much revenue they. All these promise's just lead to lies, yet people vote for these parties thinking they will fulfill their promise's. All these election platforms need to be given to an independant accounting firm. Very much doubt any platform will add up.

i dunno ... although my definition of mainstream would include the ndp and green party ... i don't think they necessarily stand for corruption as much as the liberals and conservatives ...

i think if you vote for ndp/green ... you are voting for an ideological shift - you may not agree with it but i wouldn't say its not grounded in the corruption we see in the other two parties ...

haffajappa

its that god damned sweater vest.


urban centres you can count on, but the rural population will step out of their church on sunday and eat up all of his rhetoric and vote him in. again. never fails!

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

Yes I consider the NDP mainstream, the Green Party could be considered mainstream as well, they got a million votes last election. And was May not going to except a senate seat if a coalition was formed after 2008? If so this makes them corrupt. I'm tired oh hearing the parties are going to do for us when do not even really know how much revenue they. All these promise's just lead to lies, yet people vote for these parties thinking they will fulfill their promise's. All these election platforms need to be given to an independant accounting firm. Very much doubt any platform will add up.

i dunno ... although my definition of mainstream would include the ndp and green party ... i don't think they necessarily stand for corruption as much as the liberals and conservatives ...

i think if you vote for ndp/green ... you are voting for an ideological shift - you may not agree with it but i wouldn't say its not grounded in the corruption we see in the other two parties ...

Yes voting NDP or Green is shift in ideology...does that mean less corruption? Have either of those parties outlined what they will do when faced with a fellow mp doing wrong, a department that is doing wrong? Polaris I am tired of these politicians screaming he's corrupt or their corrupt without actually putting forward a solution to the problem.

If you were to majorly screw up at work, steal from your employer or spend carelessly would you have a job? So why does no political party put forward solutions? For solutions that include firing for the most severe infraction.

Looking at the latest scandal, the supposed $50 million boondoggle...it's easy for us to comment on a forum, but I don't think it's appropriate for the party leaders to comment until AG has released her final report.

The opposition parties who want the report tabled know full well that it can't be tabled unless parliament is sitting, this make those other parties corrupt, their trying to be opportunist.

If their trying to prevent a Harper majority then they need to focus on something else, because apparently corruption is not a concern of the Canadian public.

I didn't get to see the debate, from what I read it was a lot of 3 on 1, which was expected.

Best line of the night... “Why do you have the worst attendance record in the House of Commons of any Member of Parliament?” the NDP leader asked. “Most Canadians, if they don’t show up for work, they don’t get a promotion.”

polaris_x

like i said ... this is history repeating itself with the harris cronies ...

this is corruption at its finest ...

*************************
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadav ... hikes.html

Newly released documents suggest the Conservative government fattened the pay of some political staffers while the country was tackling an economic crisis in 2009.

In one case, a senior aide's salary was raised to $190,000 — $35,000 more than the maximum rate.

News of those bonuses comes two days after The Canadian Press revealed that, in the future, more staffers will become eligible for an increase in salary and separation benefits thanks to guidelines enacted this month.

The Treasury Board Secretariat, which oversees federal human-resources management, says in its guidelines for political staff that paying more than the maximum in a salary range should be a rare occurrence.

Two years ago, those maximum rates were $121,000 for chiefs of staff to ministers of state, and $155,600 for a chief of staff to a full-fledged minister.

"As a general rule, the maximum salary range is reserved for employees with a relevant professional qualification, 10 or more years' relevant prior employment experience, or extraordinary skills and qualifications," reads the document.

Paying someone more than the maximum would be an "exceptional circumstance," says the Treasury Board, and can only happen after consultation with the Prime Minister's Office.

But documents obtained under Access to Information legislation suggest it happened frequently.

After receiving a tip about the issue, The Canadian Press asked the Treasury Board to provide a summary of all instances where senior staff were paid more than the maximum salary rate.

The request specifically noted that names could be withheld, and did not ask for any additional documents.

The agency responded seven months later by withholding 50 pages of the summary, citing privacy issues and cabinet secrecy.

Following a complaint to the Information Commissioner, Treasury Board released the headings to one page of a summary table. But all other details were kept secret.

Only two salaries have been revealed from those documents: one for $190,000 and the other for $124,000.

At the time those salary exceptions were being made, the government was churning out a stimulus program to help get Canada through the economic downturn.

A spokesman for Treasury Board President Stockwell Day echoed the department's guidelines on the matter, but did not answer specific questions about the salary bumps.

"Exemptions to salary maximums are only granted in exceptional circumstances," said Michael Mueller.

"All salary exemptions are approved by the Treasury Board in accordance with the Policies and Guidelines for Ministers' Offices."

Last week, the maximum salaries for political staff were increased.

That means a chief of staff to a senior minister can now earn up to $168,000 without an exception. A press secretary can make up to $102,000.

Since political staffers' salaries are to be tied to those of public servants, all those at the various AS-levels are in line for a wage increase of 1.75 per cent this year, 1.5 per cent in 2012 and two per cent in 2013 — in accordance with a new collective agreement for the civil service.

The Harper government also approved a 50 per cent increase in the maximum separation pay political aides can receive -- up to six months from four. That's on top of severance pay.

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper has warned of more belt tightening within the federal government, as it seeks $4 billion-a-year in savings in order to balance the budget by 2014-15.

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

Yes voting NDP or Green is shift in ideology...does that mean less corruption? Have either of those parties outlined what they will do when faced with a fellow mp doing wrong, a department that is doing wrong? Polaris I am tired of these politicians screaming he's corrupt or their corrupt without actually putting forward a solution to the problem.

i hear ya ... but this is the way i see it ... who gets the most corporate funding of all the parties ... the liberals and conservatives ... is it any wonder they offer kickback after kickback?

the whole idea about the accountability act was to prevent this shit but fucking harper diluted it so he can steal from canadians ... and now, he's not even interested in following the rules of democracy by hiding all this stuff ... the guy is a crook ...

why not give the ndp a shot? ... sure, you may not agree with their policies but at least they might govern with some integrity ...

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

like i said ... this is history repeating itself with the harris cronies ...

this is corruption at its finest ...

*************************
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadav ... hikes.html

Newly released documents suggest the Conservative government fattened the pay of some political staffers while the country was tackling an economic crisis in 2009.

In one case, a senior aide's salary was raised to $190,000 — $35,000 more than the maximum rate.

News of those bonuses comes two days after The Canadian Press revealed that, in the future, more staffers will become eligible for an increase in salary and separation benefits thanks to guidelines enacted this month.

The Treasury Board Secretariat, which oversees federal human-resources management, says in its guidelines for political staff that paying more than the maximum in a salary range should be a rare occurrence.

Two years ago, those maximum rates were $121,000 for chiefs of staff to ministers of state, and $155,600 for a chief of staff to a full-fledged minister.

"As a general rule, the maximum salary range is reserved for employees with a relevant professional qualification, 10 or more years' relevant prior employment experience, or extraordinary skills and qualifications," reads the document.

Paying someone more than the maximum would be an "exceptional circumstance," says the Treasury Board, and can only happen after consultation with the Prime Minister's Office.

But documents obtained under Access to Information legislation suggest it happened frequently.

After receiving a tip about the issue, The Canadian Press asked the Treasury Board to provide a summary of all instances where senior staff were paid more than the maximum salary rate.

The request specifically noted that names could be withheld, and did not ask for any additional documents.

The agency responded seven months later by withholding 50 pages of the summary, citing privacy issues and cabinet secrecy.

Following a complaint to the Information Commissioner, Treasury Board released the headings to one page of a summary table. But all other details were kept secret.

Only two salaries have been revealed from those documents: one for $190,000 and the other for $124,000.

At the time those salary exceptions were being made, the government was churning out a stimulus program to help get Canada through the economic downturn.

A spokesman for Treasury Board President Stockwell Day echoed the department's guidelines on the matter, but did not answer specific questions about the salary bumps.

"Exemptions to salary maximums are only granted in exceptional circumstances," said Michael Mueller.

"All salary exemptions are approved by the Treasury Board in accordance with the Policies and Guidelines for Ministers' Offices."

Last week, the maximum salaries for political staff were increased.

That means a chief of staff to a senior minister can now earn up to $168,000 without an exception. A press secretary can make up to $102,000.

Since political staffers' salaries are to be tied to those of public servants, all those at the various AS-levels are in line for a wage increase of 1.75 per cent this year, 1.5 per cent in 2012 and two per cent in 2013 — in accordance with a new collective agreement for the civil service.

The Harper government also approved a 50 per cent increase in the maximum separation pay political aides can receive -- up to six months from four. That's on top of severance pay.

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper has warned of more belt tightening within the federal government, as it seeks $4 billion-a-year in savings in order to balance the budget by 2014-15.

I agree the corruption is there...front and centre. If you want corruption out of government, then neither the conservatives or liberals will get rid of corruption. What I would like to hear either from the ndp or green party is what they plan on doing to prevent this kind corruption and will they pass legislation that tackles corruption in government, and I'm not hearing that.

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

I agree the corruption is there...front and centre. If you want corruption out of government, then neither the conservatives or liberals will get rid of corruption. What I would like to hear either from the ndp or green party is what they plan on doing to prevent this kind corruption and will they pass legislation that tackles corruption in government, and I'm not hearing that.

ya ... when you think about it ... that's really what the ndp and greens should do ... at every opportunity - highlight the history of entitlement and corruption those two parties have and say how they will govern with integrity ...

ShimmyMommy

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I agree the corruption is there...front and centre. If you want corruption out of government, then neither the conservatives or liberals will get rid of corruption. What I would like to hear either from the ndp or green party is what they plan on doing to prevent this kind corruption and will they pass legislation that tackles corruption in government, and I'm not hearing that.

ya ... when you think about it ... that's really what the ndp and greens should do ... at every opportunity - highlight the history of entitlement and corruption those two parties have and say how they will govern with integrity ...

agreed....we need them to have moral responsibility to the citizens of the nation first, not to themselves and the might dollar first.

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I agree the corruption is there...front and centre. If you want corruption out of government, then neither the conservatives or liberals will get rid of corruption. What I would like to hear either from the ndp or green party is what they plan on doing to prevent this kind corruption and will they pass legislation that tackles corruption in government, and I'm not hearing that.

ya ... when you think about it ... that's really what the ndp and greens should do ... at every opportunity - highlight the history of entitlement and corruption those two parties have and say how they will govern with integrity ...

If they did run on bringing integrity to government that would give voters much better choice...I don't want someone to say where going to bring integrity and end corruption. I want to know that if someone within the government is doing something that is not within the rules then action will be taken, not just removed from cabinet...have the RCMP investigate...bring criminal charges if necessary.

In a way they all blew it for me with AG draft document, they know someone broke the rules by releasing that document...they know it's only a draft document...they know it can't be tabled until parliament is sitting, I would have gained respect instantly for the opposition party that had said "no comment...because it's a draft document that someone released and in doing so broke the rules and the document can't be tabled unless parliaments sitting". None of the parties took the opportunity to show me they would be different and reserve judgement until the AG tabled her full report.

Jack Layton said he would take 24 hours to read the budget before deciding, he took all of 24 minutes. Iggy had decided before it was tabled. My understanding is that May was offered a senate seat if the coalition of a couple years ago went through. This is not appropriate behaviour of anyone who wants me to believe they will bring integrity to government.

Now to that whole G8/G20...sure their was corruption involved...you and I can say that without the final report, where not in a position that could deceive the public or alter the outcome of an election based on reports that are not yet finalized.

However, I do not think this will change people minds very much, because most people feel that all politicians are corrupt...from what I've seen over the last week or so none of them have convinced me that they are not.

I suggest the opposition parties focus on how they can make Canada a better place or Harper will have his majority, because all this corruption accusation does not appear to be working...imo

polaris_x

well ... this is politics ... saying they wouldn't comment until the final report comes out is not reasonable ... frig - the conservatives are essentially running a negative ad campaign and are throwing out accusations that don't even meet the sniff test ... in fact, the AG had to ask the Cons to remove a quote they are using inappropriately from their ad campaign ... they literally took a quote from her about 9/11 and attributed it to the G8 with the direct intention to mislead! ... so, to ask the other parties not to comment is like saying ok ... CONS - you can sling mud but we'll just sit here ...

corruption isn't an issue simply because many conservative voters don't care ... unless it's the other parties ...

as for the G8 spending - it isn't even necessary to see the final document ... all the final document will say is whether or not there was misappropriations of funds ... what we know for a FACT is that they made a $50 million "legacy fund" and spent it on kickback projects in conservative ridings during a time of economic downturn where services are cut and people are losing jobs ... they took a fund that is generally around $5 million for all similar events and jacked it up to $50 million so they can give their friends money to do projects that were totally superficial ... that is already known ... the only thing the AG final document will show is whether they did it without going thru infrastructure canada ...

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

well ... this is politics ... saying they wouldn't comment until the final report comes out is not reasonable ... frig - the conservatives are essentially running a negative ad campaign and are throwing out accusations that don't even meet the sniff test ... in fact, the AG had to ask the Cons to remove a quote they are using inappropriately from their ad campaign ... they literally took a quote from her about 9/11 and attributed it to the G8 with the direct intention to mislead! ... so, to ask the other parties not to comment is like saying ok ... CONS - you can sling mud but we'll just sit here ...

corruption isn't an issue simply because many conservative voters don't care ... unless it's the other parties ...

as for the G8 spending - it isn't even necessary to see the final document ... all the final document will say is whether or not there was misappropriations of funds ... what we know for a FACT is that they made a $50 million "legacy fund" and spent it on kickback projects in conservative ridings during a time of economic downturn where services are cut and people are losing jobs ... they took a fund that is generally around $5 million for all similar events and jacked it up to $50 million so they can give their friends money to do projects that were totally superficial ... that is already known ... the only thing the AG final document will show is whether they did it without going thru infrastructure canada ...

Nobody should show up and vote May 2nd, send a message to all political parties!!!! As far as I can tell they are all corrupt and will maintain a vote for any of them is vote for corruption.

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

Nobody should show up and vote May 2nd, send a message to all political parties!!!! As far as I can tell they are all corrupt and will maintain a vote for any of them is vote for corruption.

i'm voting green ...

lukin2006

ShimmyMommy wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I agree the corruption is there...front and centre. If you want corruption out of government, then neither the conservatives or liberals will get rid of corruption. What I would like to hear either from the ndp or green party is what they plan on doing to prevent this kind corruption and will they pass legislation that tackles corruption in government, and I'm not hearing that.

ya ... when you think about it ... that's really what the ndp and greens should do ... at every opportunity - highlight the history of entitlement and corruption those two parties have and say how they will govern with integrity ...

agreed....we need them to have moral responsibility to the citizens of the nation first, not to themselves and the might dollar first.

Agreed their responsibility should be to their constituents who elected them first not the party...how many NDP and Liberals said during the last campaign that if a private members bill was introduced to eliminate the long gun registry they would vote to eliminate it, and of course they voted along party lines, so they have no more integrity than the the conservatives. They all just like to take the moral high ground. The system is corrupt...imo, and no one is willing to step up and be different and act differently, separate yourself from the herd...someone had a chance this week, none took it, just corruption in the who political process.

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

Agreed their responsibility should be to their constituents who elected them first not the party...how many NDP and Liberals said during the last campaign that if a private members bill was introduced to eliminate the long gun registry they would vote to eliminate it, and of course they voted along party lines, so they have no more integrity than the the conservatives. They all just like to take the moral high ground. The system is corrupt...imo, and no one is willing to step up and be different and act differently, separate yourself from the herd...someone had a chance this week, none took it, just corruption in the who political process.

the gun registry should not be scrapped ... all the police boards are behind it and the program costs very little to maintain now ...

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

Nobody should show up and vote May 2nd, send a message to all political parties!!!! As far as I can tell they are all corrupt and will maintain a vote for any of them is vote for corruption.

i'm voting green ...

Well they are probably the least corrupt of them all...but not corrupt free, and with a different leader I could consider them...May just gets on my nerves, one of those who likes to take the moral high ground but was willing to accept a senate seat. That is one NDP idea I like, abolish the senate...just a place for the liberals and conservatives to give their buddies cozy jobs!!!

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

Agreed their responsibility should be to their constituents who elected them first not the party...how many NDP and Liberals said during the last campaign that if a private members bill was introduced to eliminate the long gun registry they would vote to eliminate it, and of course they voted along party lines, so they have no more integrity than the the conservatives. They all just like to take the moral high ground. The system is corrupt...imo, and no one is willing to step up and be different and act differently, separate yourself from the herd...someone had a chance this week, none took it, just corruption in the who political process.

the gun registry should not be scrapped ... all the police boards are behind it and the program costs very little to maintain now ...

I was just using it as an example...that's a whole new thread...hehehehe, I don't care either way, I would not vote for someone based on their gin registry views.

The only thing about the gun registry that bothers me is if we're going to have 1 the gun owner need to pay a registration fee, right now they do no pay a fee. I pay yearly to register my car so I don't see why this should be any different.

ShimmyMommy

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

Nobody should show up and vote May 2nd, send a message to all political parties!!!! As far as I can tell they are all corrupt and will maintain a vote for any of them is vote for corruption.

i'm voting green ...

i have been for the last couple of elections...least amount of corruption and they are thinking of the environment...I figure it balances it out somehow