tml12

What we have now in the Senate is a chamber of discussion, not a chamber of decision. A second chamber of decsion IS a check and balance agisnt the tyranny of the PMO. I do not agree that the House should be the sole place where legislation is debated and decided. "how do you think electing a senate would change this balance" There is no balance in our current system. I seek to establish a balance. The Senate is a place where laws go for a cup of coffee. Really I did appreciate the fact that Martin and Trudeau appointed non-Liberals to the Senate to try and make it more fair but the whole concept of the Senate is bogus.

Interesting Black Dog, I think I might agree you with. PR won't result in electioneering budgets because no party will ever be at the wheel. Plus, they'll all be too busy playing to special interest groups... The economy right now in terms of foreign investment is being held back by our reluctancy to elect a majority government. Whether its Liberals or Conservatives (they both govern from the right, pro-business anyways) we need a majority government to make us more attractive to investment. PR would make a majority impossible, but this ridiculous reluctancy from the East is just as, if not more, damaging then PR ever would be from an investment perspective... unless we PR'ed the NDP... Hey there with your Eastern comment... I agree with PR to an extent even though I have argued against it to an extent on this board earlier. What I don't support is government instability...a minority government is OK once in awhile but if we had to live with this forever? Most Canadians don't want that.

Pure democracy is little more than mob rule -- two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. As none other than Benjamin Franklin himself put it.

2 I believe...the Liberal leadership campaign was in 1990, Martin got elected in 1988. I was a delegate!!! I thought you were a Conservative... Read a good bit on Kevin Taft today challenging Harper to attack Klein. Let's see where that goes because it is going to be interesting to see if Harper follows up on his provincial rights pledge. If Harper attacks him he is going to the Supreme Court no doubt.

Leafless, Your position is a perfectly respectable one, but could you elaborate on how and why you think the National Health Service in the UK, for example, discriminates against the usage of public funds?

Then that explains why I find it distasteful. I believe that was an answer to the original question. Call it whining if you want. I'm from the US - born here. I didn't say I wasn't from here, just not an immigrant to the US. Using your own logic. I disagree that most Americans are racist. So do I...where in the U.S. do you live and would like to recount any specific issues of racism for us?

Does anyone really think this is anything more than Harper just playing tough against the US to show the liberals that he won't be a lap dog? That is what I have been saying all day.

You are assuming that MPs and the House of Commons have 'power', which is not really true. The extremely sad reality of our 'system' is that MPs do what they are told by their parties, period. In a majority govt - which is normal - the Prime Ministers Office is nearly wholly responsible for the legislative agenda. Nothing happens in the House or Senate unless apporved and presented by the PMO. The House rubber stamps whatever the PMO tells it to. The Senate does the same. There are no checks and balances. This is what must change. That's my point.. how do you think electing a senate would change this balance. I just have the feeling you would end up having Senate leaders and so forth, and then the Senate would become a whole new chamber of discussion , much like the US Senate. Completely agreed...it only serves a point in reaffirming patronage. More discussion would be nice in some matters, and a waste in others. Either way, it needs to be elected or abolished. It serves no good as it is now.

I don't support PR but I don't support first past the post either...I support a revival of the election process.

That's a great line uOttawaMan, DAMN that's a really good line (especially since I am pretty moderate). You are on a roll, what with your Sens on a role and now fantastic political humour!!!

"Appoint a dictator for life." Isn't that what we already do for four years?

Gee I thought democracy in the Middle East was a god thing. Maybe now some folks will stopequating elections with democracy. Also: Hamas election was a vote against corruption Sounds familiar, doesn't it? I wonder if Hamas asked voters to Stand Up for Palestine.... This is NOT good.

Again, I think you need to look at it from both sides of the issue and not just "what do those damn Americans want now? Why don't they just f**k off?" Really if someone wants something from you then work out an agreement...don't just be hostile about it. If you have a grudge from the beginning, the end result will not be positive. I understand and agree, however the USA does not have a great record of honouring agreemnts when they don't get their way and that must be kept in mind while at the table. This can not be ignored, and it weakens our position considerably when you live next door to the bully that could roll over and crush us if we assert our sovereignty. I do not disagree. However, I always give people the benefit of the doubt. The U.S. wants to negotiate, then we negotiate. If they are being unfair, we retaliate. Of course past considerations should be kept in mind...

Yeah I'd like to know that too... Then we can have a debate about why TooInvolved think all Americans are racist.

Money keeps flowing to the system. My doctor thinks it's a human resources problem. To be honest with you, I think she's probably right but politicians and bureacrats just don't seem to care. UK-style health care is really something we should look into at this point...health care, like bilingualism, is turning into another myth of Canada. I do not want a few individuals to profit off taxpayer money. It should all go into the collective pot to build a strong sytem where all Canadians can benefit. I agree changes need to be made, but the changes need to be in support of strengthening the system, not dismantling it. I would have been behind you 100% if this was 5-6 years ago. But what you have to keep in mind is that the Canada Health Act has to get through: 1) A Supreme Court ruling for this province that says we can now buy private health insurance. In fact, most Montrealers got something from Quebec Blue Cross in the mail asking if we want in. 2) Hundreds of private institutions all around this country. Many I pass every day here in the city. 3) Ralph Klein has basically already said "I am violating the act, kiss my ass." 4) Healthcare was supposed to be "fixed for a generation" in fall 2004. Why are we still discussing it now? It must be because money either isn't the problem or we can't fix it. The best doctors are going to the States or Europe. When I was working in the States, my doctor was a McGill medical school graduate who moved down to the States because "it makes no sense" to stay in Canada if you're in the medical profession. She said you wouldn't believe how many Canadian doctors are becoming successful in the States...50% of Canadian doctors are burnt out and suffer from alcohol and/or drug conditions.

Again, I think you need to look at it from both sides of the issue and not just "what do those damn Americans want now? Why don't they just f**k off?" Really if someone wants something from you then work out an agreement...don't just be hostile about it. If you have a grudge from the beginning, the end result will not be positive.

Money keeps flowing to the system. My doctor thinks it's a human resources problem. To be honest with you, I think she's probably right but politicians and bureacrats just don't seem to care. UK-style health care is really something we should look into at this point...health care, like bilingualism, is turning into another myth of Canada.

One must ask the question, Leafless, whether or not it has gone too far already. I am not sure we can save the system after the Supreme Court Ruling and continued violations of the Canada Health Act.

And why not? Seems quite obvious...

"I strongly disagree. Canada, like the USA, is not a true democracy." What with the PM appointing the ethics commissioner, every Senate member, Supreme Court members without any judicial process...that is WAY MORE democratic then what those authoritarian Americans do down there... "It is unacceptable to allow the majority a vote when it comes to ANY social issues. As we have seen in previous votes, self interest can win out over what is beneficial for society as a whole." Do you know who James Madison is? Because I specialize in political theory and, if you ever read the American Federalist Papers, you would be able to ferment a better argument on the subject. "This is way too authoritarian. No way. :angry:" Good thing we have a minority government now, eh? We need to keep that king, I mean, democratically-elected person in check for an unstable amount of times...

Woooo hoo! LOL Canadians will never be as right wing as Americans. It's just not in our genes ('cept Alberta their genetically all Americans) LOL (Kidding! Of course it's not genetic -- it's attitude) Don't you see the above comment is the reason Day isn't leader, is the reason Harper was "toned down" by his handlers and even with a million more people voting in this election, didn't get a majority. No bloody way the freaky right wing is going to make my family (and 99.9% of all other Canadian families) bow to their supposed "righteousness". When I meet right-wing and left-wing Americans, they don't seem much different than their counterparts on this side of the border.

Speaker, I think that you look at the situation in a much more pessimistic matter than you need to. Sure, attitudes like yours have been why the Liberal Party governs without much opposition in this country...because they run on a platform to protect Canadian sovereignty. I think you need to look at the United States and see it as a country that we can work with. I think your fears are unfounded and based mainly on the fear so many of us have of the United States. Let's make an agreement, check it out, and see where it goes. And most of all: let's be optimistic about it...

Word. That's why I loathe he average American "liberal" almost more than I despise the Republicans. the G.O.P and their base may be fascists in waiting, but with them, at least you know where you stand. "Liberals" in the States like to prattle on about "illegal war " this and "civilian casualties" that, but at the end of the day, they can't help but get a raging hard-on at the thought of America exercising its power at the expense of the "other" (for example, if the President is a Democrat who's illegally bombing Serbians or Iraqis). American exceptionalism and its right to do whatever the hell it pleases is a truism for many on both sides of the political debate: the only disagreement is the context. Can't disagree with you there.

You are not wrong. We need a new approach in dealing with the environment. We need a new approach. Kyoto was doomed from the start. Canada signed it and didn't do anything. The U.S. never signed it. When nations want to sit down and talk about it again, it should happen and it should happen soon.

Wow that's got to be the fastest and easiest conversion I've seen since about third grade. I mean that in a complimentary sense. Unless I misunderstood the YankAbroad wasn't talking about Canada sharing the waterway, YankAbroad was talking about sharing the wealth. in return for American Protection, The ultimate in capitalism is the Mafia. Think about this, if the wealth is sufficient to be bought with American assistance why isn't it enough to buy by ourselves? Or think about something else if you'ld rather, but please think. I'm honoured...I think... I thought this was about sharing the waterway. But maybe I am wrong. What I do know is that if we can form a symbiotic relationship I think it will improve relations at the present and also benefit both countries down the road.