i guess it depends on where u see that centre line ... i consider the liberals centrist for canadians ... the conservatives used to be more centre-right when they were the progressive conservative ... but now, they are governing more right than centre for sure ...
In their social policies, or at least some of them (i.e., gay marriage), then yes, I agree. In many ways, though, they are not seriously challenging Canadian liberalism.
In their social policies, or at least some of them (i.e., gay marriage), then yes, I agree. In many ways, though, they are not seriously challenging Canadian liberalism.
i think our mission in afghanistan is a significant move to the right ... our further inaction (please note the word further) on the environment is also a shift further right ... so far, most of his actual moves are to satisfy the right wing part of the electorate ... tax cuts, military, etc.
i think our mission in afghanistan is a significant move to the right ... our further inaction (please note the word further) on the environment is also a shift further right ... so far, most of his actual moves are to satisfy the right wing part of the electorate ... tax cuts, military, etc.
Except that, like I point out ad naseum, the mission to Afghanistan is also a Liberal party policy ... Or at least, was. Now that its more unpopular, they will probably attempt to divorce themselves from it. Its not clear to me at all that these things would not have also occured under another Martin government (Afghanistan, softwood lumber, maybe even tax cuts).
Except that, like I point out ad naseum, the mission to Afghanistan is also a Liberal party policy ... Or at least, was. Now that its more unpopular, they will probably attempt to divorce themselves from it. Its not clear to me at all that these things would not have also occured under another Martin government (Afghanistan, softwood lumber, maybe even tax cuts).
the mission scope has changed under the conservative gov't ... i would think softwood lumber would be different as the liberals passed on the deal the conservatives agreed on ... they would have continued with the courts where we were winning ... there wouldn't be the gst cuts nor the cancellation of the child care plan ...
i wonder if the liberal gov't would have killed the rotterdam convention like the conservatives did ... hard to say ...
... this clean air act and plan on climate change is proof of that ... just like bush's plan ... aimed to divert attention and do nothing ... its sad ... the country waited a year and is doing nothing about climate change for this "made in canada" plan ...
at the end of the day - the country is a liberal country in the way it votes ... all they have to do is not fraud the people and they will be in power ...
Too bad the Liberals have no ideas, and the last time they were in power showed themselves to do less for the environment in 16 years than the PC in 18 months.
Harper's plan falls short no doubt about it. But there was some real progress made with mandatory auto emission standards. Harper's plan did not address the greenhouse gas emissions coming from oil exploration in Alberta. But until Kyoto adopts a user pay system rather than a manufacturer pay system hte Alberta situation will never be addressed. ie Canada should not fiscally pay because someone in Germany wants to use Canadian oil.
I'd like to see anyone's plan to address the Alberta situation that does not adversely affect their economy,
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
the mission scope has changed under the conservative gov't ... i would think softwood lumber would be different as the liberals passed on the deal the conservatives agreed on ... they would have continued with the courts where we were winning ... there wouldn't be the gst cuts nor the cancellation of the child care plan ...
i wonder if the liberal gov't would have killed the rotterdam convention like the conservatives did ... hard to say ...
Maybe so, maybe so ... By the way, you don't support the GST cut, I'm assuming?
Too bad the Liberals have no ideas, and the last time they were in power showed themselves to do less for the environment in 16 years than the PC in 18 months.
Harper's plan falls short no doubt about it. But there was some real progress made with mandatory auto emission standards. Harper's plan did not address the greenhouse gas emissions coming from oil exploration in Alberta. But until Kyoto adopts a user pay system rather than a manufacturer pay system hte Alberta situation will never be addressed. ie Canada should not fiscally pay because someone in Germany wants to use Canadian oil.
I'd like to see anyone's plan to address the Alberta situation that does not adversely affect their economy,
Not that this means much at all, I am just messing around ... But take a look at a pic of Ignatieff. Does me bear a resemblance to any other well-known political figure?
Too bad the Liberals have no ideas, and the last time they were in power showed themselves to do less for the environment in 16 years than the PC in 18 months.
Harper's plan falls short no doubt about it. But there was some real progress made with mandatory auto emission standards. Harper's plan did not address the greenhouse gas emissions coming from oil exploration in Alberta. But until Kyoto adopts a user pay system rather than a manufacturer pay system hte Alberta situation will never be addressed. ie Canada should not fiscally pay because someone in Germany wants to use Canadian oil.
I'd like to see anyone's plan to address the Alberta situation that does not adversely affect their economy,
although i wasn't happy with their progress and they spent too much time holding committee and meetings - they were under way with a plan ... a plan that had many corporations investing in newer technologies ... a plan that all companies scrapped until they heard what the conservative plan was ... the liberals may not have accomplished much but saying the conservatives have done more in 18 mths is only true if you are talking about sending us backwards with the environment ...
at the end of the day - we need to cut our carbon emissions - the conservatives are trying to convince us that growing emissions is a good thing ...
alberta is debt free and the richest province in the country ... it is booming ... would it kill them to spend a few bucks on curbing emissions? ... we all will suffer from the environmental impacts of oil exploration and use - alberta needs to not just reap the rewards and not consider the consequences ...
Maybe so, maybe so ... By the way, you don't support the GST cut, I'm assuming?
most definitely do not support the gst cut ... in the face of massive underspending on infrastructure and social programs - there is no way the dollars i've said would even come close to offsetting the impacts ...
alberta is debt free and the richest province in the country ... it is booming ... would it kill them to spend a few bucks on curbing emissions? ... we all will suffer from the environmental impacts of oil exploration and use - alberta needs to not just reap the rewards and not consider the consequences ...
I think the onus and burden should be paid by the consumer, and that a carbon based tax should be added to those products based on the amount of greenhouse gases created either in their production or use.
Any other system hurts the manufacturing country only while the consuming country gets a free ride.
Ultimately I know that I as the Candian will feel this burden highly but accept this as equitable when it is a global problem requiring global solutions.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
I think the onus and burden should be paid by the consumer, and that a carbon based tax should be added to those products based on the amount of greenhouse gases created either in their production or use.
Any other system hurts the manufacturing country only while the consuming country gets a free ride.
Ultimately I know that I as the Candian will feel this burden highly but accept this as equitable when it is a global problem requiring global solutions.
ok ... its not what i would do but its something ... i would accept that but they are doing nothing ...
but right now we are not even contributing equally to our impact ... we are the highest users of energy per capita ... we can look at burgeoning countries all we want but we aren't even cleaning up our own backyard ...
Not that this means much at all, I am just messing around ... But take a look at a pic of Ignatieff. Does me bear a resemblance to any other well-known political figure?
He may be an idiot but he's still the best leader to choose from from the major Canadian parties.
The Liberals should have elected Manley as their leader at the last convention instead of Martin, or even better Chretien stayed on and Canada would be in Afgahanstan and nowhere else.
"So forget the other boys because my love is real.
Come off your battlefield."
The Liberals should have elected Manley as their leader at the last convention instead of Martin, or even better Chretien stayed on and Canada would be in Afgahanstan and nowhere else.
Chretien is a tool (although I did agree with the Iraq decision). Manley might have been interesting, though.
Harper is taking every que from the evangelical far right wing Bush republicans. Nothing he says holds any weight. This is just proof of his depth of wisdom and character. The man is a joke as our PM.
He is clearly trying to divide canada. Will it work?. I dunno, because i can't trust election results now from our government that totaly admires an administration that fucks with the people's votes and tricks them into illegal wars, ect ect ect.
Democracy at risk here in canada.
am i wrong?
time always resides in my corner
so we will see.
EVIL is coming, You are Nagungo now!
Paranoia and ignorance get you nowhere.
1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
Its kinda funny, yet kinda scary at the same time. People have learned nothing from the last election campaign o' fear.
yeah ... learned nothing ...
seriously tho - i don't like campaigns that are based on bashing other parties but lets face it ... the fears many of us have had (and we can easily go back to the threads pre-election) have turned out to be exactly true ...
if this xerox of bush's clear skies policy isn't proof that harper is running the neo-con play book - i dunno what is ...
Its kinda funny, yet kinda scary at the same time. People have learned nothing from the last election campaign o' fear.
Campaigns of fear have FAR less of an impact on Canadians than they do Americans as Americans are born and bred to seek protection from their leaders rather than seeking leaders who will work to try to ensure America doesn't need protection. That said, the only reason that the Conservatives are in power in Canada is that the Liberal government were in power for too long and they became corrupt. It happens to every government when they are in power for an extended period of time. The same shit will happen to the Conservatives after they win the next election. Then the Liberals will come in and the cycle will begin again. People come on here and draw parallels of Harper's Conservatives to the Bush administration as if the Liberals wouldn't have us in exactly the same place that we are in right now. As a former paying member of the Progressive Conservative party, I will let you in on a little secret: there is no difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives. They hate each other, but both parties bring essentially the same agenda to the table year in and year out.
1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
i can't believe she has the nerve to stand there and say their transit tax credit takes 56,000 cars off the road ... we must be idiots cuz they are treating us like we are ...
anyhoo - they may be similar (conservatives and liberals) but there is no fucking way it'd be like this ... at least the liberals would try and do stuff for all canadians ... this group is only serving their electoral base ..
News reports have been suggesting recently that terrorists have been stepping up their attacks in accordance with the upcoming November elections. One would speculate in an attempt to destroy Bush and curb the war effort.
Is it a such stretch to believe if these terrorists were given voting rights that they would vote Democrat? Because there would be no terrorism with a Democrat in the white house. The world trade center attack of '93 never happend. In '95 the bombing of the National Guard training center in Riyadh was a myth. In '96, rockets fired into the U.S. embassy in Athens was a hoax. The Palastenian gunman who opened fire on tourist atop the empire state building in '97 had the wrong country. Who really believes the bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salem were really aimed at US soldiers?
The U.S.S. Cole was bombed October 12th, 2000. Was Bush creating terrorism then as well?
"Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
seriously tho - i don't like campaigns that are based on bashing other parties but lets face it ... the fears many of us have had (and we can easily go back to the threads pre-election) have turned out to be exactly true ...
Healthcare is in danger ... Abortion will get banned ... We'll have troops in Iraq. Climate change will take a step backward.
NONE of these things have actually happened. And yes, climate change efforts are no worse than they were under the Liberals and their bullshit lies about following Kyoto.
What is your problem, polaris? Truly ... You blow things completely out proportion, and your views don't change one whit based on what actually happens.
This thread lack a bit of Quebec perspective ... hope everyone is doing fine, can't post much these days...
Quebec as 'nation' divides Liberal candidates
Last Updated: Saturday, October 21, 2006 | 10:58 PM ET
CBC News
The Quebec wing of the Liberal party voted Saturday to recognize the province as a nation, and agreed to work to make that official if the Liberals are elected in the next federal election... http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/10/21/liberal-leadership.html
Quebec government unhappy that federal program won't help all older workers.
QUEBEC (CP) - A federal aid program for older workers isn't helping to boost relations with Quebec that have already been strained by Ottawa's environment plan and scrapping the gun registry.
On Wednesday, the Charest government said it was disappointed that the federal program to help older employees who have lost their jobs excludes those working in Montreal, Quebec and Gatineau. http://www.cbc.ca/cp/business/061018/b1018120.html
Guns: a Question of Control
Ban semi-automatics, Quebecers say
Quebecers are generally leery of guns. Most don't own any, and wouldn't have one in the house.
A strong majority favours an outright ban on semi-automatic fire-arms of the sort that was in the killer's arsenal in the recent Dawson College shooting rampage.... http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=9141e92a-4bae-4d13-bf50-ec37cd18590b&k=67031
Provinces looking for federal money to back clean-air efforts
Canadian Press
Published: Sunday, October 22, 2006
OTTAWA (CP) - Canada's two biggest provinces are upset that the Conservative clean air plan doesn't mention multi-million-dollar promises made by the previous Liberal government to help curb air pollution. http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=e21527aa-3607-4934-9d72-1d36affb4839&k=56027
Bloc would topple Tories 'any time'
Kevin Dougherty, CanWest News Service; Montreal Gazette
Published: Sunday, October 22, 2006
QUEBEC CITY -- Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe served notice Saturday that his party is prepared to defeat the Harper government in a confidence vote, even if that means provoking a federal election before Christmas.
"We will be ready before the holidays," Duceppe told about 450 delegates and observers to a weekend meeting of his party's general council.... http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=b48917f5-b02c-459b-a366-c9c15e64c954&k=16245
Quebec pumps $733M into flagging forestry sector.
Quebec's plan to deal with its forestry crisis is being welcomed by labour leaders, despite Premier Jean Charest's warning that more layoffs may be imminent.
The $733-million plan, unveiled in Trois-Rivières Friday morning, includes broad measures to assist unemployed workers, mill towns and companies struggling to adjust to what Charest has called the worst crisis in the forestry sector's history.... http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2006/10/20/quebecforestryplan.html
"L'homme est né libre, et partout il est dans les fers"
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Theodore's Montreal return a disaster
Canadian Press
10/22/2006 1:03:36 PM
MONTREAL (CP) - They were not the headlines Jose Theodore hoped to make when he returned to Montreal for the first time as goaltender for the Colorado Avalanche.
"Theo humiliated" screamed the front page of Le Journal de Montreal on Sunday, over a picture of a puck heading into his net.
Healthcare is in danger ... Abortion will get banned ... We'll have troops in Iraq. Climate change will take a step backward.
NONE of these things have actually happened. And yes, climate change efforts are no worse than they were under the Liberals and their bullshit lies about following Kyoto.
What is your problem, polaris? Truly ... You blow things completely out proportion, and your views don't change one whit based on what actually happens.
my problem?? ... i think my problem is that because you don't see things the way i do - you think i'm blowing things out of proportion ...
the reality is that we don't agree on what is going on ... the fact is that we have taken a step backward ... there WAS a plan to reduce emissions - a plan that most progressive nations in the world has agreed to be part of - we have now essentially backed out of that plan - if that isn't backwards - what is??
our mission in afghanistan has changed significant scope ... we USED to be a peacekeeping nation ... we are now at war - big difference ... we USED to be a country of neutrality - but we are decidely on the side of israel now ... and no one said Abortion would get banned but considering his minority stance - he has raised many issues that only his right wing base want opened up (gay marriage) ...
either way - i don't expect you to see things the way i do but at least i don't think u've got a problem ...
my problem?? ... i think my problem is that because you don't see things the way i do - you think i'm blowing things out of proportion ...
the reality is that we don't agree on what is going on ... the fact is that we have taken a step backward ... there WAS a plan to reduce emissions - a plan that most progressive nations in the world has agreed to be part of - we have now essentially backed out of that plan - if that isn't backwards - what is??
our mission in afghanistan has changed significant scope ... we USED to be a peacekeeping nation ... we are now at war - big difference ... we USED to be a country of neutrality - but we are decidely on the side of israel now ... and no one said Abortion would get banned but considering his minority stance - he has raised many issues that only his right wing base want opened up (gay marriage) ...
either way - i don't expect you to see things the way i do but at least i don't think u've got a problem ...
There was never a plan to reduce emissions. That was the problem with Canada signing onto Kyoto. We made a committment, but that committment was not backed by any plan.
I don't get where people get the whole Canada is a peacekeeping nation and a country of neutrality. Our history is war and taking sides. Canada's military were willing participants in WWI, WWII, Korea and more. We've never shyed away from takinh sides based on Canadian principals. Canada has a very proud military and war time history that no amount of revisionism can cancel.
Unfortunately, Canada's more recent history under the Liberals has seen the downsizing of our miltary so that Canada is insignificant on the world stage. We couldn't be peacekeepers if we wanted to, we don't have the resources. And please don't take Liberal apathy towards international issues for neutrality. There's a reason Canada hasn't been invited to the world stage to help solve problems, our government didn't care. Apathy is not neutrality. A willingness to speak out based on Canadian and UN values is not taking sides.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
There was never a plan to reduce emissions. That was the problem with Canada signing onto Kyoto. We made a committment, but that committment was not backed by any plan.
I don't get where people get the whole Canada is a peacekeeping nation and a country of neutrality. Our history is war and taking sides. Canada's military were willing participants in WWI, WWII, Korea and more. We've never shyed away from takinh sides based on Canadian principals. Canada has a very proud military and war time history that no amount of revisionism can cancel.
Unfortunately, Canada's more recent history under the Liberals has seen the downsizing of our miltary so that Canada is insignificant on the world stage. We couldn't be peacekeepers if we wanted to, we don't have the resources. And please don't take Liberal apathy towards international issues for neutrality. There's a reason Canada hasn't been invited to the world stage to help solve problems, our government didn't care. Apathy is not neutrality. A willingness to speak out based on Canadian and UN values is not taking sides.
i'm not saying the plan was great but there was most indeed a plan ... in case you didn't know - many of the rebates the gov't offered for making home energy efficient were cancelled by the tories ... the big polluting industries ALL had plans in place but put them on hold until they heard what the new plan was and now that they don't have to do anything ... guess what - we've moved backwards ... really, at the end of the day - there is no defence for the most recent clean air act ... it flies in the face of the bullshit harper spewed about the liberals doing too much consultation and nothing ... that piece of legislation should be insulting to you as a canadian ...
our history is based on post WWII ... we do have a history of peacekeeping and neutrality ...
what our prime minister is doing now is not espousing Canadian nor UN values ... but we might have differing opinions on what those values are ...
my problem?? ... i think my problem is that because you don't see things the way i do - you think i'm blowing things out of proportion ...
the reality is that we don't agree on what is going on ... the fact is that we have taken a step backward ... there WAS a plan to reduce emissions - a plan that most progressive nations in the world has agreed to be part of - we have now essentially backed out of that plan - if that isn't backwards - what is??
our mission in afghanistan has changed significant scope ... we USED to be a peacekeeping nation ... we are now at war - big difference ... we USED to be a country of neutrality - but we are decidely on the side of israel now ... and no one said Abortion would get banned but considering his minority stance - he has raised many issues that only his right wing base want opened up (gay marriage) ...
either way - i don't expect you to see things the way i do but at least i don't think u've got a problem ...
What surferdude said. Seriously, though ... Maybe I should not have said that you have a "problem", but to me, there's a huge difference between what Harper has actually done and what all the panickers said he was going to do. I don't agree with your country of neutrality point, either. We aren't neutral and never have been. The mission that the Liberals approved was a combat one, not a peacekeeping mission. NATO involvement means a military operation ... How has Harper expanded the scope, beyond sending some Leopard tanks and more troops than originally planned? The mandate hasn't changed that much from the original commitment, I'd argue.
I also don't believe that we are 100% on the side of Israel in that dispute either. We did A LOT to bring Lebanese civilians here during the chaos ... And personally, I do not think that our government should concede that a terrorist organization like Hezbollah has a valid point to make. Harper could have said more to support the Lebanese populace, granted. I said that back in the day. However, his decision to take a less than neutral stance had basically no impact on the conflict or its resolution. All he did was cheese off people who have serious issues with Israel's actions, and you know what? If that turns out to be at all significant next election, then he'll only have himself to blame.
What surferdude said. Seriously, though ... Maybe I should not have said that you have a "problem", but to me, there's a huge difference between what Harper has actually done and what all the panickers said he was going to do. I don't agree with your country of neutrality point, either. We aren't neutral and never have been. The mission that the Liberals approved was a combat one, not a peacekeeping mission. NATO involvement means a military operation ... How has Harper expanded the scope, beyond sending some Leopard tanks and more troops than originally planned? The mandate hasn't changed that much from the original commitment, I'd argue.
I also don't believe that we are 100% on the side of Israel in that dispute either. We did A LOT to bring Lebanese civilians here during the chaos ... And personally, I do not think that our government should concede that a terrorist organization like Hezbollah has a valid point to make. Harper could have said more to support the Lebanese populace, granted. I said that back in the day. However, his decision to take a less than neutral stance had basically no impact on the conflict or its resolution. All he did was cheese off people who have serious issues with Israel's actions, and you know what? If that turns out to be at all significant next election, then he'll only have himself to blame.
we brought back canadians ... what would have helped the most is to condemn ALL actions that cause civilian suffering ... that is the Canadian and UN philosophy i believe we shared ... look at the death toll for canadian soldiers since harper took over - its gone way up because the scope of the mission changed - we were originally tasked of securing one area, now we're all over the place chasing guys who can't be caught ... afghanistan and iraq are one in the same ...
anyhoo - if you guys do consider the environment to be important - then hopefully, you see the true colours of this gov't with their policies ...
I don't know what you guys think the COns. did well, they did most of what they said they'd do, but it doesn't mean they did well. The 3 leaders in the Liberal leadership run would be better Prime Minister than Harper. Conservatives will lose the next election, my early prediction.
They need more Quebec seats, or more Ontario seats, they will lose some in Quebec cause Liberals voters will just go back to the Liberals since the Cons. are just going down in public opinion and the LIbs seem to be looking forward to re-open the Constitution (about fucking time). I don't think the Cons. will win more seats in Ontario either, so it leaves them with another minority, or a Liberal minority, the later is more credible. We'll see soon enough...
"L'homme est né libre, et partout il est dans les fers"
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Comments
In their social policies, or at least some of them (i.e., gay marriage), then yes, I agree. In many ways, though, they are not seriously challenging Canadian liberalism.
i think our mission in afghanistan is a significant move to the right ... our further inaction (please note the word further) on the environment is also a shift further right ... so far, most of his actual moves are to satisfy the right wing part of the electorate ... tax cuts, military, etc.
Except that, like I point out ad naseum, the mission to Afghanistan is also a Liberal party policy ... Or at least, was. Now that its more unpopular, they will probably attempt to divorce themselves from it. Its not clear to me at all that these things would not have also occured under another Martin government (Afghanistan, softwood lumber, maybe even tax cuts).
the mission scope has changed under the conservative gov't ... i would think softwood lumber would be different as the liberals passed on the deal the conservatives agreed on ... they would have continued with the courts where we were winning ... there wouldn't be the gst cuts nor the cancellation of the child care plan ...
i wonder if the liberal gov't would have killed the rotterdam convention like the conservatives did ... hard to say ...
Harper's plan falls short no doubt about it. But there was some real progress made with mandatory auto emission standards. Harper's plan did not address the greenhouse gas emissions coming from oil exploration in Alberta. But until Kyoto adopts a user pay system rather than a manufacturer pay system hte Alberta situation will never be addressed. ie Canada should not fiscally pay because someone in Germany wants to use Canadian oil.
I'd like to see anyone's plan to address the Alberta situation that does not adversely affect their economy,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Maybe so, maybe so ... By the way, you don't support the GST cut, I'm assuming?
Not that this means much at all, I am just messing around ... But take a look at a pic of Ignatieff. Does me bear a resemblance to any other well-known political figure?
although i wasn't happy with their progress and they spent too much time holding committee and meetings - they were under way with a plan ... a plan that had many corporations investing in newer technologies ... a plan that all companies scrapped until they heard what the conservative plan was ... the liberals may not have accomplished much but saying the conservatives have done more in 18 mths is only true if you are talking about sending us backwards with the environment ...
at the end of the day - we need to cut our carbon emissions - the conservatives are trying to convince us that growing emissions is a good thing ...
alberta is debt free and the richest province in the country ... it is booming ... would it kill them to spend a few bucks on curbing emissions? ... we all will suffer from the environmental impacts of oil exploration and use - alberta needs to not just reap the rewards and not consider the consequences ...
most definitely do not support the gst cut ... in the face of massive underspending on infrastructure and social programs - there is no way the dollars i've said would even come close to offsetting the impacts ...
Any other system hurts the manufacturing country only while the consuming country gets a free ride.
Ultimately I know that I as the Candian will feel this burden highly but accept this as equitable when it is a global problem requiring global solutions.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
ok ... its not what i would do but its something ... i would accept that but they are doing nothing ...
but right now we are not even contributing equally to our impact ... we are the highest users of energy per capita ... we can look at burgeoning countries all we want but we aren't even cleaning up our own backyard ...
kerry of course.
Come off your battlefield."
Chretien is a tool (although I did agree with the Iraq decision). Manley might have been interesting, though.
EVIL is coming, You are Nagungo now!
Paranoia and ignorance get you nowhere.
Its kinda funny, yet kinda scary at the same time. People have learned nothing from the last election campaign o' fear.
yeah ... learned nothing ...
seriously tho - i don't like campaigns that are based on bashing other parties but lets face it ... the fears many of us have had (and we can easily go back to the threads pre-election) have turned out to be exactly true ...
if this xerox of bush's clear skies policy isn't proof that harper is running the neo-con play book - i dunno what is ...
Campaigns of fear have FAR less of an impact on Canadians than they do Americans as Americans are born and bred to seek protection from their leaders rather than seeking leaders who will work to try to ensure America doesn't need protection. That said, the only reason that the Conservatives are in power in Canada is that the Liberal government were in power for too long and they became corrupt. It happens to every government when they are in power for an extended period of time. The same shit will happen to the Conservatives after they win the next election. Then the Liberals will come in and the cycle will begin again. People come on here and draw parallels of Harper's Conservatives to the Bush administration as if the Liberals wouldn't have us in exactly the same place that we are in right now. As a former paying member of the Progressive Conservative party, I will let you in on a little secret: there is no difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives. They hate each other, but both parties bring essentially the same agenda to the table year in and year out.
anyhoo - they may be similar (conservatives and liberals) but there is no fucking way it'd be like this ... at least the liberals would try and do stuff for all canadians ... this group is only serving their electoral base ..
Is it a such stretch to believe if these terrorists were given voting rights that they would vote Democrat? Because there would be no terrorism with a Democrat in the white house. The world trade center attack of '93 never happend. In '95 the bombing of the National Guard training center in Riyadh was a myth. In '96, rockets fired into the U.S. embassy in Athens was a hoax. The Palastenian gunman who opened fire on tourist atop the empire state building in '97 had the wrong country. Who really believes the bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salem were really aimed at US soldiers?
The U.S.S. Cole was bombed October 12th, 2000. Was Bush creating terrorism then as well?
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
Healthcare is in danger ... Abortion will get banned ... We'll have troops in Iraq. Climate change will take a step backward.
NONE of these things have actually happened. And yes, climate change efforts are no worse than they were under the Liberals and their bullshit lies about following Kyoto.
What is your problem, polaris? Truly ... You blow things completely out proportion, and your views don't change one whit based on what actually happens.
Quebec as 'nation' divides Liberal candidates
Last Updated: Saturday, October 21, 2006 | 10:58 PM ET
CBC News
The Quebec wing of the Liberal party voted Saturday to recognize the province as a nation, and agreed to work to make that official if the Liberals are elected in the next federal election...
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/10/21/liberal-leadership.html
Quebec government unhappy that federal program won't help all older workers.
QUEBEC (CP) - A federal aid program for older workers isn't helping to boost relations with Quebec that have already been strained by Ottawa's environment plan and scrapping the gun registry.
On Wednesday, the Charest government said it was disappointed that the federal program to help older employees who have lost their jobs excludes those working in Montreal, Quebec and Gatineau.
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/business/061018/b1018120.html
Guns: a Question of Control
Ban semi-automatics, Quebecers say
Quebecers are generally leery of guns. Most don't own any, and wouldn't have one in the house.
A strong majority favours an outright ban on semi-automatic fire-arms of the sort that was in the killer's arsenal in the recent Dawson College shooting rampage....
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=9141e92a-4bae-4d13-bf50-ec37cd18590b&k=67031
Provinces looking for federal money to back clean-air efforts
Canadian Press
Published: Sunday, October 22, 2006
OTTAWA (CP) - Canada's two biggest provinces are upset that the Conservative clean air plan doesn't mention multi-million-dollar promises made by the previous Liberal government to help curb air pollution.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=e21527aa-3607-4934-9d72-1d36affb4839&k=56027
Bloc would topple Tories 'any time'
Kevin Dougherty, CanWest News Service; Montreal Gazette
Published: Sunday, October 22, 2006
QUEBEC CITY -- Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe served notice Saturday that his party is prepared to defeat the Harper government in a confidence vote, even if that means provoking a federal election before Christmas.
"We will be ready before the holidays," Duceppe told about 450 delegates and observers to a weekend meeting of his party's general council....
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=b48917f5-b02c-459b-a366-c9c15e64c954&k=16245
Quebec pumps $733M into flagging forestry sector.
Quebec's plan to deal with its forestry crisis is being welcomed by labour leaders, despite Premier Jean Charest's warning that more layoffs may be imminent.
The $733-million plan, unveiled in Trois-Rivières Friday morning, includes broad measures to assist unemployed workers, mill towns and companies struggling to adjust to what Charest has called the worst crisis in the forestry sector's history....
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2006/10/20/quebecforestryplan.html
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Theodore's Montreal return a disaster
Canadian Press
10/22/2006 1:03:36 PM
MONTREAL (CP) - They were not the headlines Jose Theodore hoped to make when he returned to Montreal for the first time as goaltender for the Colorado Avalanche.
"Theo humiliated" screamed the front page of Le Journal de Montreal on Sunday, over a picture of a puck heading into his net.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=181600&hubname=nhl
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
my problem?? ... i think my problem is that because you don't see things the way i do - you think i'm blowing things out of proportion ...
the reality is that we don't agree on what is going on ... the fact is that we have taken a step backward ... there WAS a plan to reduce emissions - a plan that most progressive nations in the world has agreed to be part of - we have now essentially backed out of that plan - if that isn't backwards - what is??
our mission in afghanistan has changed significant scope ... we USED to be a peacekeeping nation ... we are now at war - big difference ... we USED to be a country of neutrality - but we are decidely on the side of israel now ... and no one said Abortion would get banned but considering his minority stance - he has raised many issues that only his right wing base want opened up (gay marriage) ...
either way - i don't expect you to see things the way i do but at least i don't think u've got a problem ...
I don't get where people get the whole Canada is a peacekeeping nation and a country of neutrality. Our history is war and taking sides. Canada's military were willing participants in WWI, WWII, Korea and more. We've never shyed away from takinh sides based on Canadian principals. Canada has a very proud military and war time history that no amount of revisionism can cancel.
Unfortunately, Canada's more recent history under the Liberals has seen the downsizing of our miltary so that Canada is insignificant on the world stage. We couldn't be peacekeepers if we wanted to, we don't have the resources. And please don't take Liberal apathy towards international issues for neutrality. There's a reason Canada hasn't been invited to the world stage to help solve problems, our government didn't care. Apathy is not neutrality. A willingness to speak out based on Canadian and UN values is not taking sides.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
i'm not saying the plan was great but there was most indeed a plan ... in case you didn't know - many of the rebates the gov't offered for making home energy efficient were cancelled by the tories ... the big polluting industries ALL had plans in place but put them on hold until they heard what the new plan was and now that they don't have to do anything ... guess what - we've moved backwards ... really, at the end of the day - there is no defence for the most recent clean air act ... it flies in the face of the bullshit harper spewed about the liberals doing too much consultation and nothing ... that piece of legislation should be insulting to you as a canadian ...
our history is based on post WWII ... we do have a history of peacekeeping and neutrality ...
what our prime minister is doing now is not espousing Canadian nor UN values ... but we might have differing opinions on what those values are ...
What surferdude said. Seriously, though ... Maybe I should not have said that you have a "problem", but to me, there's a huge difference between what Harper has actually done and what all the panickers said he was going to do. I don't agree with your country of neutrality point, either. We aren't neutral and never have been. The mission that the Liberals approved was a combat one, not a peacekeeping mission. NATO involvement means a military operation ... How has Harper expanded the scope, beyond sending some Leopard tanks and more troops than originally planned? The mandate hasn't changed that much from the original commitment, I'd argue.
I also don't believe that we are 100% on the side of Israel in that dispute either. We did A LOT to bring Lebanese civilians here during the chaos ... And personally, I do not think that our government should concede that a terrorist organization like Hezbollah has a valid point to make. Harper could have said more to support the Lebanese populace, granted. I said that back in the day. However, his decision to take a less than neutral stance had basically no impact on the conflict or its resolution. All he did was cheese off people who have serious issues with Israel's actions, and you know what? If that turns out to be at all significant next election, then he'll only have himself to blame.
we brought back canadians ... what would have helped the most is to condemn ALL actions that cause civilian suffering ... that is the Canadian and UN philosophy i believe we shared ... look at the death toll for canadian soldiers since harper took over - its gone way up because the scope of the mission changed - we were originally tasked of securing one area, now we're all over the place chasing guys who can't be caught ... afghanistan and iraq are one in the same ...
anyhoo - if you guys do consider the environment to be important - then hopefully, you see the true colours of this gov't with their policies ...
They need more Quebec seats, or more Ontario seats, they will lose some in Quebec cause Liberals voters will just go back to the Liberals since the Cons. are just going down in public opinion and the LIbs seem to be looking forward to re-open the Constitution (about fucking time). I don't think the Cons. will win more seats in Ontario either, so it leaves them with another minority, or a Liberal minority, the later is more credible. We'll see soon enough...
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau