Jerry J. Fortin

A large portion of Canadian economy was agrarian in nature before the second world war wasn't it? That changed because the American industry involved in the war effort sought and acquired both raw material and products from Canadian soiurces to fuel their growing capacity to fight wars. From this point forward our society changed in a dramatic manner. Check it out and see for yourself, granted we did it ourselves but tell me that the Americans had nothing to do with it. To a large degree we OWE our economic position to them. Take all of the American investment out of this country, all of the jobs, all of the advances we have made. Then tell me that we don't owe them a "thanks" for being a good neigbor. Well you answered you own question there.........

First of all there is a large difference between captial punishment and abortion. One is the choice of the individual the other is a choice of society as a whole. Lets take this one step at a time in a logical debate about these two contentious issues. Do we want individual rights, or do we want the state to tell us how to live? If you promote individual rights then you must accept the current abortion practices. If you do not support individual rights then you can take those rights away from the citizen and prevent them from acting in what they believe is their best interests. Do we want capital punishment ? If you want capital punishment you are giving the state the right to kill and denying that right to the citizen. Aside from that it implies that you trust the government with your own life and have faith they will not make a mistake and take your life in error. I do not trust the government with my life.

So what? I live in the Bible Belt in Alberta, there are lts of folks out here believe the same thing. I agree that there are far better things to beat on Yankees for, but why beat them at all? Canadians need to look around and find out who their friends really are. We OWE the Americans a hell of a lot and we don't want to recognize this fact. Guess what, its time to wake up and smell the coffee. In my books I would rather trust an American than a central Canadian ! At least I know what the American agenda is, and they aren't going to try and tax me to death. Oh they might build a few factories and hire thousands of people, but they will stay the hell out of my pocket.

Its true that the government does find new and entertaining ways to spend tax dollars. My problem with that is simply that some of those dollars are mine. In fact too many of those dollars are mine, or should I say were mine. Witholding taxes are a government means of conducting monetary terrorism upon citizens. The entire system stinks from the ground up. The means of creating revnues streams for government spending requires some rethinking in my opinion. Withholding taxes reduce disposable familiy income. That reduction has a direct corresponding impact on our markets and a direct impact on our standard of living. Increasing disposable family income will therefore have a positive impact on the marketplace. So why on earth do we not get the government out of our pockets with incomes taxes and shift to a market place levy of taxation. Tax people on what they spend. Spend a little and pay a little in tax to the government, spend a lot and pay a whole bunch of tax to the government. You are only paying taxes on what you can afford and it doesn't detract from your ability to get what you need. Next step is convincing the government that those funds they do receive in their revenue stream are the property of the citizens not a slush fund for their pleasure. They need to actually put in an honest days work to get an honest days pay. You can't tell me there is no waste in government operations. These folks should be looking for and eliminating wasted expenditures, that is their real job. We don't need as many new laws as we need to get rid of some of the old ones. Instead of trying to fix what isn't broke, why not start taking the broken stuff out to the dumpster. We need a caretaker government to clean up the mess of 140 years worth of garbage legislation, before we can hope to make any real changes. Other wise we will just be building on shaky foundations at best. Like I said before we need a new and different vision for government. The people of this country deserve better than what we have. We know we can do better so what on earth is wrong with us? We must get off our collective butts and start working the problem. If the fed doesn't get its act together the nation will come unglued. Quebec has said so for years, and now Albertans are making noise. Time is running out for Canada.

There seems to be a whole lot of praise for Harper going on in this forum. Lets look at the record for a minute and see what he has done to earn this kind of respect. Harper wins election on November 28 2005. Parliment opens 39th session April 3 2006. It took four months just to organize his victorious party and show up for work. Twenty-22 Bills proposed in the House of Commons during 39th Parliment Spring session. Only three receive Royal Assent. C-8 An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of Canada for the financial year ending March 31, 2007 The President of the Treasury Board, The Hon. John Baird Royal Assent (May 11, 2006) C-13 An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on May 2, 2006 The Minister of Finance, The Hon. James Michael (Jim) Flaherty Royal Assent (June 22, 2006) C-15 An Act to amend the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food, The Hon. Charles (Chuck) Strahl Royal Assent (June 22, 2006) Between April 3 and June 23 the government takes 43 days off and works 60 days. Intersting number because in total it took an average of more than 60 working days to pass each bill in this Parlimentary session. So at least in Parliment Harper accomplished very little. According to the Prime Minister this is what he has done; http://pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=1223 • Passed through the House of Commons the Federal Accountability Act – the most sweeping anti-corruption legislation in Canada’s history; • Lowered taxes for all Canadians; • Introduced legislation to crack down on street-racing and gun and gang crime; • Introduced the Universal Child Care Program, which will provide direct financial assistance to all Canadian families, as well as create real child care spaces; • Enhanced Canada’s leadership role on the international stage by extending the mission in Afghanistan; and • Ushered in a new era of open federalism, as evidenced by the recent agreement between the Government and Quebec that established a formal role for the province at UNESCO. While the record is one thing, even it can be spun to produce results! At any rate it is safe to say that what was accomplished fell far short of the overall workload. So much so that if he was working for somebody on civy street he may have been fired.

I advocate a republican tri-cameral system, that is true. I have no desire to re-create an American style government in Alberta. I do advocate direct democracy based on a tri-cameral system. We need to be able to choose a leader ourselves instead of leaving such an important position to chance and the internal selection of partisan effort. Alberta citizens want to see an end to equalization because our taxes leave the province forever. The whole idea behind taxation is setting a levy upon citizens to fund the programs and services that the citizens desire. Alberta citizens want to see some changes in the healthcare system. Alberta citizens want a triple E senate. We simply will never get these things staying inside confederation.

The problems are complex but not insurmountable. We need a different kind of leader, not more of the same or a clone of who ever. We need a national vision.

Fixed election dates work well, period. Get rid of the confidence vote concept. Once the bastards are elected force them to go to work for four years. Open the doors at 9 am and close them at 9:05 , anybody that doesn't show up doesn't get paid. Let them out at 5pm, as long as they get their work done, otherwise its overtime for these public servants without pay of course. Give them a couple weeks off at Christmas and a couple in the summer but other than that they better be at work or they don't get paid. Miss enough work and the people get to fire them for cause, no compensation necessary. They don't need to open the constitution up to do this just enough balls to actually work for their pay and their boss, thats us. They are public servants who are in our employ, lets change the rules and do something for a change. Elect the first party to promise to actually work for a living, or better yet elect only the individuals willing to work forget about the political party. While we are at it only vote for a candidate willing to be accountable to you through pushing for recall legislation.

Modified capitalism, modified Social Credit theory. Individual rights, democracy and capitalism. Business regulated by government with profit sharing plan to employees. Elimination of taxation on incomes and base taxes on rental value of real estate. Neither big business or big government controls the citizens, instead the citizens control both through direct democracy.

Nobody has declared war. They have just decided to have one. Check the facts people and tell me the Congress has declared war, they haven't. The Commons hasn't in Britain either. There is no war. We all know there is but the simple truth is that there is no war. Administrative heads of state have acted in the interests of their military industrial complex's to use a bunch of bombs and bullits. The military industrial complex employs hundreds of thousands of people and generates billions of dollars of revenue. The tax payer is footing the bill for this war on terror, it is our blood and our money that we are giving to our governments to "protect us" from the big bad terrorists. Don't get me wrong, these terrorists need to be dealt with. But there needs to be a declaration of war in order to justify taking away all of our rights and costing us a hell of money to wage this war. This will not happen for a number of reasons, but the most important one being that some of the money the government spends on armament will have to be spread around some. The military industrial complex wouldn't like a piece of their pie shrinking so they have gone about things to protect their interests. That is bad news people, our own governments are playing a game with us that we can't win and they can't lose.

Look folks the genie is out of the bottle. There ain't nobody gonna put it back in. The deal here is simple it , the nukes, are the new big stick. Everybody wants the biggest stick to walk around in the jungle. Having said that, who gets to determine exactly whom is entitled to a big stick? As long as some smart fellas are left around to reverse engineer the damned things they are going to get built, period. That is simple logic. If you have a big stick you can sit at the table with the big boys, and get what you want. They, the North Koreans or the Iranians want to sit at the table, now how do you figure that you can stiop them from WANTING that. They want it and they are going to get it, whether we like it or not. Unless people decide to get carried away, and act to prevent it. War is the only way to prevent their acquiring nukes. Starting a war to prevent these people from getting nukes isn't real bright. Oh we will win the war, battle by battle, but we won't win the peace that follows. Sooner or later somedirt bag terrorist will get their hands on the technology ans shove it up our collective arses. That will be very bad. If you want to prevent people from ever using the damn things ban them outright. If we are going to have a war to stop Fred or Barney or whoever from getting the damned things then maybe we should wake up and figure out that we will always be faced with the same situation until we do something about it. If war is inevitable then let it be over getting rid of the detestable things. Make the possesion of a nuclear weapon a crime against humanity once and for all time. Make the punishment death by nuclear blast. Take the existing nukes and give them all to the security council, who can throw them at the idiots who think that they or their nation could have them to hold over anybody's head. These things are not toys, and nobody, no single nation should have access to them. The solution is very simple, now all that we need are the politicians will the balls to read the freaking writing on the walland act in the interests of their citizens to forever eliminate the horrific use of weapons of mass destruction.

Yeah I know that Canadians won't stand for it. But Albertans like the idea a lot.

You would have had to be a lot older than I. I remember watching his funeral vaguely. I don't remember John F. Kennedy's funeral but I do remember Robert F. Kennedy's funeral. I am only slightly old. You would have had to be very old to have talked to him! Churchill was a master politician, but that didn't save him from peacetime politics. Although I will be beaten for it, Trudeau was also a master politician. I don't think Mulroney was though. We need a master politician just to deal with the USA on this softwood lumber deal and Harper isn't qualified. Softwood is the tip of the iceberg because it sets the tone for market access. Look at the duram issues that are still outstanding. We have steel issues as well. Softwood set a precedent that we will now have to pay for. When prices fall our exporters take a back seat to their internal producers. Their internal producers gain with increased market share to enhance their profits and remain viable, on the other hand our exporting producers are gauranteed a disadvantageous position in the same market place. Isn't this the definition of protectionism? Can me a fool but I would have thought that our government would have sought to achieve at least a level playing field in this regard. By entering into this type of agreement we are creating the conditions for failureof our industry when prices fall. Now when that does happen, don't you think that the American producers will think it prime time to buy up more of our companies? Considering that the cost of acquiring those companies will be considerably lower at that point, and they can literally use their own enhanced profits realized through the same market conditions to finance they purchase. We need a politician that seeks fair and equal treatment for Canadian interests.

The Separation Party of Alberta is a dead duck. Infighting has done them in. The idea didn't die, but that party will. There are several alternatives in the works. Most of them involve a republican setting. Perhaps more important to the rest of the nation is a soon to be created federal party of Alberta origin. The design of which is very similiar to the Bloc. Not necessarily separation but separation if necessary. It will get my vote in federal politics, and probably a lot of other Albertan votes. Bad news for the Tories here.

The Liberals will not form the next government , so the leadership race will not choose the next Prime Minister. With that in mind, all of the effort in selling memberships is still a huge advantage to the party. It could help to retain its position, but don't expect any gains. The Tories have yet to start up the witchhunt they promised and we will have to wait for the leadership race for that plan to grow some legs but it will happen anyway. Afganistan is neither here nor there because the govenment sought and received a mandate in the Commons for that effort and it would not go well on parties to flip flip on that issue. The issues at play for the next election will be found to be introduced in the fall sitting. Provided that the government survives that the next opportunity is the spring budget. If the government is serious about the military build up it will be evident right then and there. The public will not vote against arming the military unless the government cuts programs and services to do it. The whole fiscal imbalance situation can be played to the advantage of the government with this in mind. Funding could be realized through the diversion of the federal surplus into the military, and the government could actually claim that it is the only way that they can find to do the job, and they won't be lying about it.

But it doesn't really make any difference who leads that party into the next election. The Liberals will lose again, that is a foregone conclusion. Steve will likely not get the majority he wants, but he will win a larger minority government. The split is what is buggering up the numbers here folks. The NDP will get more seats the next time around, and some of those will come from the Conservatives. The Bloc will lose a few seats to both the Liberals and the Conservatives. And the Conservatives will gain a few more seats in Ontario. In order for the Liberals to form a government Steve has to choke and puke, that is a fact. Until he does forget about claiming his throne people.

So all you need to do is sign a piece of paper, not have kids and stay stoned at the expense of the state! I think this welfare state things has gone a little too far.

I am all for Quebec sovereignty. I don't think they can make it on their own, but that is their choice I think. I am an Alberta seperatist so I am going to side with the Quebec fellas on this one. The cost of government is indeed a consideration, but accountability and democracy have a far higher priority in my books. Until there is a viable means of holding their fingers to the fire we will not see any real change in the way things are going. Citizenss need a means of interaction with the government in order to provide their input, which to my view is an imperative in a democracy. It is the public who the government is supposed to work for, they are supposed to be servants of the public. Under the current system the PMO has far more power and far less accountability than the Presidents office in a republic. What we now have is a representative parlimentary system. In this system there is too many appointed positions and too few free votes. There are no term limits to office and there is no recall legislation. They can get in and stay in with no way to get rid of them. There is nothing democratic about that. Now a direct democracy may be unworkable for a large country like Canada, but it would ertainly function well in a smaller country like Alberta. In that system there is true democracy, the citizens determine the outcome of just about everything that effects them.

You KNEW Sir Winston? I met Trudeau a couple of times, Turner once, Tobin a few times..three actually but that is about it for Canadian politicians. I must agree Belinda isn't Churchill, but this isn't England mate!

Who knows what to believe. Volpe is a joke. Dion is too French. Dryden a cold fish. Ignatia an egg head. Gads who the hell else is there?

I should have been more detailed in my post. This guy is an opportunist, plain and simple. He is cock sure and doesn't give a damn what people think. He wants power he craves the limelight, your basic politician I guess but he doesn't give me a warm a fuzzy feeling. Neither did Belinda, I value loyalty highly, changing sides is a bit dangerous, and this is the case in politics as well.

I think that the G8 should be the basis for the security council. I would like to see the veto gone, and let the politics fly without it. The UN won't work properly until there is no veto and the entire membership is held accountable for their actions. Sanctions punish citizens, not the political leadership of a nation. There has to be a better way to do things in an international format.

I dislike American foreign policy. The reason for this is that they have so many interests that it looks like they have their finger in every pie on the planet. In truth, it is their business people out there creating wealth, and the government looks after its citizens and companies. The citizens of the USA are good people, but their foreign policy sucks! The Americans are under the gun big time right now. Already involved in two seperate fronts a third may be cooking right now. Bush is trying to hold down the fort and avoid a North Korea conflict, it won't be easy to do that. Meanwhile its getting a bit expensive fighting the battles he currently finds himself trapped in. I sort of like the guy, if he still drank beer I would enjoy sitting down for a couple with him. Al Gore didn't give me that feeling. My only hangup with Clinton was that he lied to save his own butt. I couldn't care less what he did with his cigars, but the Paula Jones thing was another matter. I am afraid the sun is setting on the American Empire. There are too many short memories in the world today. America has made a lot of enemies, any one of which they could handle in a heartbeat but things are starting to stack up a tadd. Unless they develop some new "edge" either military or economic there could well be problems in the near future. The scariest scenario on the economic side is if the Euro becomes the standard currency for oil. On the military side the worst case scenario is North Korea. But there are other hidden dangers lurking around out there. Look at South America. There is a bunch of economic trouble there for US business in the oil patch. In fact there seems to be a growing lefty trend down there that simply won't be good news for the USA. Bush is holding his own, not by much, but he is doing what he is supposed to do. Of course opinion polls show that he is way down in the basement. What can you expect having to fight a war where the end is not in sight and the body bags are stacking up. The real trouble will start when his term ends. Hillary may have a viable shot. Can you imagine how the middle east diplomats will view this? Actually I think she will win, and get blamed for everything under the sun.

Emerson! Interesting character, maybe he will switch to the NDP next election. That might be the only way to keep his seat.

You folks think there is no problem? No recall legislation, no elected senate, no free votes, no electing a leader and no problem. Ontario and Quebec get to call the ball for the rest of the country and there is no problem. Equalization pays some(most) provinces to sit on their hands and do nothing about their fiscal situation and there is no problem. I have to ask what you folks think a problem would be if these things do cut it for you?