madmax

Bump

The Right Wing have plenty of media. The looney right only has Fox News.

Did we miss this poll??? Or am I amiss this time in massive thread drift ? CPC Majority in sight or still out of reach? CPC 39% (up) LPC 29% (down) BQ 10% NDP 13% (down)

What part of 11 years don't you understand??? Back to polls... maybe a new one was cooked over the weekend

Don't take it like a snub. The all went to the bathroom before the photo opp. That's all, could happen to anyone.

OAS and CPP owe their existance to Woodsworth. Not to the Progressive Conservatives or the Liberals. However, if you wish to say the NDP are lying in that they created CPP, then you can say the same for all policy taken from the CCF and NDP and implemented by government. What you have suggested is that the NDP played no role. Considering the origins of a Canadian Pension Plan originate with the founder of the CCF and is a good idea, it is a bold statement you make that the NDP played no role in the creation of CPP. The NDP played the same role as all the other parties..... "That same year, the three federal parties - Liberal, Progressive Conservative and New Democratic Party - made a commitment to the principle of a contributory, wage-related pension" Essentially, the argument you make is that the PCs and the Liberals came to the same conclusion as the CCF/NDP and got busy doing something good for Canadians. http://www.histori.ca/default.do?page=.canhistory_index The video is created by the Canadian Government.

Because the NDP wanted strings attached to the bailout and the CPC and LPC didn't. If you look at the bailout, it is a corporate wet dream.

Back on polls.. YUP back into third.

Good.

You did, and you are now backtracking.

You're on thin ice.Tommy Douglas had the program 11 years before the chief shored it up. It was a program adopted by other provinces 4 years later. 7 years after that, the feds got involved. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada In 1946, Tommy Douglas' Co-operative Commonwealth Federation government in Saskatchewan passed the Saskatchewan Hospitalization Act, which guaranteed free hospital care for much of the population. Douglas had hoped to provide universal health care, but the province did not have the money In 1950, Alberta created a program similar to Saskatchewan's. Alberta, however, created Medical Services (Alberta) Incorporated (MS(A)I) in 1948 to provide prepaid health services. This scheme eventually provided medical coverage to over 90% of the population. In 1957, the federal government passed the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act to fund 50% of the cost of such programs for any provincial government that adopted them. The HIDS Act outlined five conditions: public administration, comprehensiveness, universality, portability, and accessibility. These remain the pillars of the Canada Health Act. The Saskatchewan program proved a success and the federal government of Lester B. Pearson, pressured by the New Democratic Party (NDP) who held the balance of power, introduced the Medical Care Act in 1966 that extended the HIDS Act cost-sharing to allow each province to establish a universal health care plan.

http://www.historyofrights.com/events/charter.html A year later, Alistair Stewart, recently elected member of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), presented before Parliament the first resolution to create a Canadian Bill of Rights. The CCF had been calling for entrenching certain rights in the constitution since its founding in 1933.

Our society is better off for it, regardless whether the NDP is rewarded at the polls.

Erm, are you not looking at the big picture? All these are protected industries. They are ripping off Canadians, regardless that many Canadians are apathetic to those boring issues. If you want to talk about the "recession" the Industrial base is what drives an economy. The NDP has the strongest industrial policies of any political party. Not that anyone is looking. The Liberals don't have an industrial policy. The CPC has no industrial policy but in similar vision to the LPC of using Trade deals as economic engines. For good measure, it was shortly after the 08 election, when it could no longer be hidden the deep shit the economy was in and the false pronouncements of the CPC that everything was fine and deficits were not in the forecast. It was the disgraceful excuse for an economic update that sparked outrage and created the impetus for Canada to get on with the global stimulus spending. After the money is allocated, the arguments are about WHO benefits. If you are suggesting the NDP shouldn't campaign on Credit Card, bank and cellphone fees, perhaps your right. But that doesn't mean that something shouldn't be done to put an end to the gouging going on.

The War was popular with as many as 75% of the US public. It was also popular with such intellectuals and economists known as Mike Ignatieff and Stephen Harper Not so much with the Canadian public or with the then Chretian government. However, the Afghan war was a mixed response, and the mission creep of the Martin Liberals was continued with the Harper Conservatives. It has accomplished very little at a great cost in lives. Afghanistan is not popular, which actually means the NDP was with the majority of the public in this regards. The NDP believed... health care, CPP, FIRA, EI, were important. If the NDP had to base their policies of what people thought was important, we could call them CPC or LPC and fold up their tents. That 20% is a group of people who think differently. Their ideas are not alway bad. Infact some of the best ideas that this country cherishes are directly the result of the having a CCF/NDP within the house with a base of 8% to 20% in polls and few seats. As long as people believe that "Tax Cuts" are good and servics are "Not good" and that the government still manages to get their hands deep into our pockets... CAN YOU SAY INCREASED EI CONTRIBUTIONS and HST, then people will continue to be taxed, corporations will continue to receive welfare, and the public will own the shaft. 80% of the public accepts this and the other 20% are of a diverse group of people who believe differently, if not the same. Fact is, as has been said before, no matter how much a party moves mainstream, there will always be another group in the minority outside the mainstream. Moving the NDP into mainstream, would only mean that a new party would have to be formed to challenge mainstream thought. Today we have a strange event. The public is sitting in the Centre and the goverment is a double split right and a split left with no one occupying the middle. Regardless, there is room for a political party in the 20% range that advocates for consumer protection and social justice issues. I am not certain that anyone would want this element removed or exceeding 50%.

Story says it all. I don't think there is anymore to it. Besides, Turner is better off without the LPC and visa versa. I do like his parting shots at CPC fiscal incompetence. He knows the CPC is raising taxes.

You can fool some of the people some of the time.

It is a disgrace that the CPC called an election last year against the spirit of their own fixed election law. The Harper Conservatives were not in Jeopardy, were not about to be defeated in parliment and had had 100% support from the Liberal Party in EVERY VOTE OF CONFIDENCE. Yet the opportunistic and unprincipled party QUIT their own government and went to the polls hoping to be rewarded for their cleverness. How is it possible that when the government was REALLY GOING TO FALL, the Harper Conservatives postponed the vote of confidene and then went running to the apron strings of the GG. It seems losing power was not in the spirit of the law but calling elections is was good for the Conservative Party and not the country is fine by you and other lapdogs of CPC love ins. The bottom line is that it is not possible to have a fixed term in a minority parliment unless one creates a coalition with a written agreement not to bring down the government. Otherwise its governance by the seat of your pants and polls.

Yes, it happens nearly every election. I don't know why.

Thread drift.... beware.... Harris left in the 2nd term completely out of steam and ready to make a bigger mess then the one he created. Unfortuneately few of the Harris major screwups can be reversed. However, Harrisite Hudak will not be elected in Ontario as many of the people who were picking on the poor in the late 90s have now found themselves mired in both Federal and Provincial Conservative Idealogy that has taken away a significant portion of the safety net that gets them stable and working again. No party has reversed these choices, until now, the Federal CPC are backtracking on the LPC choices on who is eligible for EI and how much they should be entitled too. And that is begrudgingly. Provincially, the Ontario Liberals have been happy to enjoy the benefits of the Harris choices. And while Harris couldn't balance the books in Good times, the Ontario Liberals could. Now in the bad times, the Ontario Liberals are a BIG FAT OVERBLOATED OVERSPENDING UNCONTROLLABLE organization that is still one election away from being removed from government. Irony, is that John Tory may be the one responsible for getting the first salvo through the teflon, and it didn't wind its way through until after his demise. Politics is a blood sport. Meanwhile..... Can anyone explain what Ignatieff is doing?

Right now the CPC are at the helm. And I wouldn't give the CPC very high marks for anything in Ontario over the past 3 years. On top of that the CPC is spending/bribing the Ontario Liberals with $4.6 Billion to implement a tax increase. That is 4.5 times more money then the CPC are putting into the new EI program. The CPC are also increasing Payroll Taxes on EI. JUST PEEK!!!

Thank you ToadBrother for that analyses. Your commentary on EI is exactly how I saw it.

Good Grief

YUP! However, another honest example would be better then providing a name as polarizing and hostile as the one above.