Posts posted by jdobbin
If it was done as a "made in Canada" solution...
How can there be a solution when there's no problem?
Potentially, it could be. I don't think there is any rush to change things at the moment but this assumes the monarchy as we know it is perpetual. Britain itself might end the monarchy which would make Canada's consitutional monarchy questionable.
So yes, a made in Canada solution might eventually have to be made. But that day isn't here yet. And why open up a constitutionall nightmare for a non-issue?
I would like to know: Who are these people that once voted for the NDP are now saying they would support the Tories?What do other people think?
I also want to ask those people:
What do you want from your government?
What is it that you expect from the Tories that the NDP can not deliver?
I am starting to like my rotating "turn at bat" political-power model more and more as a solution for dealing with these shenanigans. Forget about polls. Forget about elections. Hell, even forget about the electorate.
There were a few questions to that effect over the last few months. Several polls have asked what people wanted from their government.
One of the things that was wanted is an inquiry into what happened with Crocus, the labour sponsored fund. Many union people have lost a lot of money with that but Doer refuses to call an inquiry. Moreover, the receiver will not accept offers to purchase the fund. No one knows what is happening.
So, I guess for some people, a change of government might actually bring an inquiry.
There are other issues as well. Those have more to do with the overall financial management of the province. There have been some colossal bail outs in the last few months but never an investigation as to why.
For these reasons many people who voted NDP last election have lost some of that faith in the party.
So what if he isn't French enough. Those citizens have decided that French is the ONLY way to go. The rest of the nation has to include a language that a very small percentage of the population uses, and they can make the use of English a crime. Give me a break.
I thought that we could solve this with their referendum, but I guess not. We should have had a referendum when they did, our question could have been should Quebec be allowed to stay in Canada?
What do you think the rest of Canada would have said to that?
Just stating the reality of all federal parties. Stephen Harper himself would not have been leader had it not been for his French.
I personally don't think any province has a right to separate. Certainly, not with a slim majority of support at any rate.
His French isn't good enough for a federal leader.
What language does he speak, Canadian or Newfanese?
He speaks Cod. Fluently.
I am not sure but I think the only member sitting on the present council who hasnt been charged for war crimes might be Denmark - but as I said I am not sure about that.
I'm still stinging about the Vikings. My sister's red hair is testament to their crimes.
His French isn't good enough for a federal leader.
Some people are calling it the "halo effect" of a Conservative government in Ottawa and a new Conservative leader in Manitoba but Probe Research has said the most cited beef has been about the poor condition of the infrastructure. It has become quite an issue as the provinces roads and bridges fall apart.
What do other people think?
Surging Tories try to stay grounded
Friday, July 7th, 2006
By Martin Cash
PROGRESSIVE Conservative party members were trying to hold back their glee and not appear cocky yesterday after Winnipeg Free Press/Probe Research poll results showed their party shooting past the governing NDP in public opinion.
Tory leader Hugh McFadyen said he was encouraged by the results that showed 43 per cent of Manitobans would support his party if there were an election tomorrow, compared to 38 per cent for the NDP.
After returning from Brandon, where Rick Borotsik, the popular former Brandon mayor and MP, was acclaimed as the party's candidate for Brandon West Wednesday, McFadyen said the party has plenty more work left to do.
"Some Manitobans may be encouraged by some of the steps we have taken, but at the end of the day we don't take voters for granted and anyone who does that gets themselves into trouble," he said. "We will continue to work hard to earn the support of Manitobans on election day."
The latest poll follows two previous ones in December 2005 and March 2006 in which the two parties were in a dead heat.
Not surprisingly, NDP Premier Gary Doer was not too enthusiastic about talking about the poll yesterday.
"I've got a drawer full of polls that have us lower than we thought and then higher than we thought," he said. "My answer is still the same -- we always campaign as if we are one vote behind."
Political analysts agree that the provincial Tories are benefiting from the honeymoon period the federal Conservative party is enjoying and the recent election of McFadyen as the provincial party's leader, which has provided fresh interest and enthusiasm for the party.
"The results are not unexpected," said Paul Thomas, a political science professor at the University of Manitoba. "That's partly because the NDP is at the mid-point or slightly past that of their second term in office. They have faced a lot of challenging issues and have been a bit on the run in the last session."
The Doer government has been hounded by accountability issues and claims of mismanagement at arms-length organizations like the Crocus Investment Fund and the Workers Compensation Board. They have also faced recent problems within the child welfare system.
"When the legislature is in session, it is the only time the opposition has a regular platform to challenge the government, make attacks and gain ground in terms of public opinion," Thomas said. "This poll comes right after the close of a session."
Thomas said things could change before the next election. One political analyst, who asked that his name not be used, said the poll will sound warning bells for the NDP.
"This is going to wake Doer up," the analyst said.
But he added that people do not know that much about what McFadyen stands for yet.
Thomas agreed, saying the last Progressive Conservative premier, Gary Filmon, clearly stood for things like fiscal restraint and budget cutting.
"Voters will wait to see what the Conservative party and the new leader stands for," Thomas said. "They will have work to do to produce a platform and to have the issues embodied in its leader, who will have to go head to head with a very experienced leader who, even though he may sometimes appear glib, has a very good grasp of the issues."
Allen Mills, a political science professor at the University of Winnipeg who has written in the past about the Doer government's comfortable hold on power, acknowledged that there is a trend afoot.
"It is an accumulation of a number of little things like the Crocus Fund, issues to do with the state of the highways and infrastructure and the sense that nothing is being done," he said.
"Those things combined do create an opening (for change)."
I'm in favour. Any monarchists on the bench? I'll argue, and happily explain why you're wrong.
I say, let's run our own affairs our own way, and let's be upfront about it. Why the heck is that foreign face on our money anyway?
I think symbols matter, and English Canadians cannot imagine the effect it would have among French Canadians.
So, is Canada a "real" country?
There's a simple reason why it won't happen: it would involve opening up the constitution again. No one wants that because it would not just be a simple thing making a Governor-General an elected position.
Every time the constitution opens, everyone piles on a list of demands: an elected, equal Senate, Aboriginal self-government, proportional representation, term limits, anti-flag burning Constitutional amendments and property rights. The list goes on and on.
And what happens? The country tears itself apart.
So Republican dreamers are probably doing just that: dreaming.
I have no opinion on whether A Republic will be good or bad. If it was done as a "made in Canada" solution, it could probably be good. But the idea that it could happen without everyone tossing their pet projects in as well is probably wishful thinking. And that would be bad.
I found an article about why the US went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Apparently. in 2000 Hussein had changed from the US$$$ to the Euro and the Taliban were in the process of doing the same. Now with the US buying their oil from this area it would mean the US$ will end up less then the C$, and they didn't want the rest of the OPEC oil countries to do the same so they decided to scare the OPEC countries by going into the 2 countries and taking over then and putting some leader in that would keep the US$$ instead of the Euro. Britain, was at the end of its oil and they also didn't want the monetary value in Euros. The US is using it military to help the oil companies control the oil industry in this area. SO. this war is about oil but more about the US dollar and its value going down if the Euro is replace against the US$. Now, let say this IS the reason for going into these countries, do you thik Canada should be there now????
The Taliban had driven the Afghanistan to become one of the poorest countries in the world. Even if they were thinking about trading in Euros, it seems quite unlikely that anyone would willingly invade them for that.
Afghanistan was the base from which continued terrorist attacks were made on North America, Africa and the Middle East. The United Nations determined that in the aftermath of September 11, the Taliban were incapable or unwilling to bring those responsible for the attacks to justice. An ultimatum was given and ignored and the result was invasion.
America's diversion to Iraq has undermined Afghanistan and probably helped allowed al Qaeda slip away to Pakistan. It has also diminished what should have been a far superior force from establishing security in Afghanistan.
Having said that, I think people should remember why Afghanistan was invaded to begin with. It wasn't oil. It was continued and repeated attacks around the world.
Obviously you don't work here. Every business oil related or not benefits, if your not doing well in Calgary/Edmonton, there is something wrong with you. Your wage increase are because of oil, if your a home owner, your property value skyrocketing is because of oil. Your stock portfolio, same deal.
The Edmonton-Calgary corridor is the richest region in the world because of oil. Tell me that we earning 10-20% on average before tax more than other Canadians is mere coincidence and oil has nothing to do with that.
We see everything in new oil patch profits.
It's stupid consumers that don't realise that buying more gas when prices go up just spurs it on. We are gouged by our own ignorance and stupidity. Gas prices go up, take a walk instead.
If consumers are willing to pay higher prices forever, then companies will raise prices forever. Common sense.
Higher oil prices do one thing for the economy: They make people think about alternative energy sources. It is slow and costly at first (take windmill energy as an example) but as costs continue to rise, the costs of the things like windmill technology start to look more affordable.
Canada might do well with thermal heating and cooling. New neighborhoods built with this system in place instead of natural gas heating could save thousands upon thousands over the course of a lifetime of ownership. And more the better, gas not used in Canada can be exported elsewhere.
First the price of gas, I have just come back for Alberta and BC where the price of gas was at least ten cents a litre more than in Ontario, what gives?
Seems theres a problem here
There's a price war going on Ontario has more grocery stores open a gas station alongside their stores. Ontario was slower than Western Canada in investing in larger supermarkets that had gas stations selling gas at a discount to attract shoppers.
These lower in Ontario gas prices will continue as the supermarkets battle it out for market share.
The Federal Republic of Canada
in Federal Politics
Every industrialized nation has some form of equalization except the United States. And their equalization program is called the Interstate Highway system where every state gets a share of the cash.
As for not having a problem with things, I go back to the "can or worms" agument. Conservatives, Liberals, NDP and Greens, Natives, minorities will all have something to add to the mix if the constitution is opened.
People can't expect that things will open just a bit to allow one amendment say for...recall and not have everyone else pile on their demands. Quite simply, the amending formula would collapse unless there was *total* agreement on an issue and complete understanding that only that issue would be addressed.