Jump to content

Michael Hardner

Senior Member
  • Posts

    42,268
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    92

Everything posted by Michael Hardner

  1. Very true, however what better time to offer tempting 'presents' to Quebec ? Perhaps Duceppe will find something under his tree this Christmas such as: 1) Boost in transfer payments 2) Trade considerations 3) Quebec allowed to issue passports Ho ho ho !
  2. Perhaps, but it is within the PM's right to ask the GG to do that. And I'm saying this as a non-conservative !
  3. BTW - I suggest that proroguing be celebrated by eating perogies, or 'proroguies' in this case.
  4. That's a tongue twister and Canadian history. I think that the GG did the right thing by not going out on a limb and following the instructions of the PM. The Queen's representative is, after all, a figurehead here and shouldn't be acting on her own judgement in my opinion.
  5. Does anyone have a link to Dion's video ?
  6. OK... so what part of 'Liberal, NDP, BQ supporters only' wasn't clear ?
  7. Simple question to lifelong Liberal, NDP, BQ supporters: Do you support the coalition ? As someone who has never voted conservative, I don't support it. I think the timing for this action is terrible, that it destabilizes the government, and that the foundation is shaky at best. Against. *Note - I didn't make this a 'POLL' thread because I don't want anonymous responses here.
  8. Thanks, mjp, for a breath of reality on online petitions.
  9. Argus, I agree that Harper seems to call forward an undeserved stream of venom from those on the left. I am (nominally) centre-left and I don't understand it myself. The only thing I can see to compare to it is the venom that comes from the right against the left. You can see both flavours of irrational knee-jerk spittoon kickers all over this board. If we focus on the facts, eventually we'll come to see that the stereotypes don't exist, and the positions we hold need data to be defensible in an argument. As for this coalition government - I have never voted conservative. Not once. And I think this is a bad idea. I would be surprised if this move was popular.
  10. If nothing else good comes out of this (and I'm betting on that) then at least some citizens might learn a little about our process, and that public anger, whatever the level, doesn't guarantee that the angered get their way.
  11. My feeling, and that of several centre-left people I know is that this is a disunifying tactic and will do more harm than good.
  12. Actually, given that Duceppe is politically a dead duck anyway, that could make great sense. Throw the corpse of Duceppe at Harper why not ? As long as Duceppe takes all the attention, and Rae and Ignatieff step out of the spotlight, they might draw some blood...
  13. It's not that they want the status quo to carry on - it's that they want more for their region. That's how Reform got their toehold in the first place - by promising to push for something that has no prayer of succeeding. Who will give up power for the greater good ? David Peterson offered up some Ontario senate seats for Charlottetown but would Quebec do it ? Would Alberta ? Highly doubtful.
  14. What does it mean to have liberty but not peace ? What's an example of that Iraq today ?
  15. And the Conservatives have always known this. So why was EEE always a major selling point for Reform ? The answer may be that it was a cynical attempt to gain a foothold in western Canada. The same could be said by the Reform party grandstand of rising in parliament to say that they wouldn't accept pensions. Remember that ?
  16. Although I don't like what Harper is doing, and would like to see lower limits - I do want to point out that Canada's general approach to election spending is eons ahead of where the US is now where hundreds of millions of dollars are spent (all of which are favours that need to be repaid) and that money is used on mass advertising and the dumbing down of the discussion.
  17. I can't imagine what the result would be, though ? Better data, that's understood. But ... then what ?
  18. Really - this is a pointless discussion. You can't argue that native North Americans had better technology - it just isn't so. And arguing about the attendant social ills that the Europeans brought is fine, but those ills came from a technological society.
  19. eb, the fact remains that these legislative changes were made publicly and without any stealth. No camera, hidden or visible, would have changed or improved the situation. There was no secrecy. Everything was done in the open, and the system failed all the same. The premise for these them of yours is that our society is being ruined by planned evil, but the fact is that we're ruined by everyone failing to do the little things.
  20. eb - What you're proposing is akin to having a chaperone at an orgy. We have controls NOW. They are visible, public, and accessible. Nobody uses them. The powers that be steal from us in plain sight. Why in blazes do we need hidden cameras in such an environment ? You're right, of course. Actually, I never considered that. This means that without God threatening hellfire over us we've lost one of the system controls ? That's actually plausible. Ok... so let's bring back... religion ?
  21. Yes, Olech. This is what the press is *supposed* to provide. But the press is a one-size-fits-all entertainment machine. CPAC is atomically dull and there's nothing else right now... If only MapleLeafWeb had power... Seriously, a serious website such as this with an honest and intelligent membership reminds me of some of the elements of the earliest American democracies. It would be interesting to see what kind of stewardship could be harnessed from these types of forums.
  22. OB, Yes but it requires learned folks to read and analyze the data on our behalf. Politicians can no longer be trusted. The media supports only 0 attention span issues... We need a new institution.
  23. EB, You're turning the tables on me. I've shown you that your idea of monitoring public officials more closely won't fix these problems. I would say that if we have complex issues that need to be monitored, we should have people monitoring those issues, and we should have the public listening to those people.
  24. Eyeball, I have pointed this out to you several times: We don't need extra monitoring when our existing monitoring (i.e. the press and medai) is ignored by the voting public. This latest crisis is yet another example. Banking deregulations were well publicized and discussed. Your idea of extra electronic monitoring would not have helped.
×
×
  • Create New...