Visionseeker

delete duplicate

Yup. The National Policy - a Liberal construct. ERR - FALSE: that was J.A. MacDonald, a Conservative. They didn't give us control of our resources (alternating Liberal and Conservative regimes). Why? Because corruption within the local political classes was far too prevalent to offer such power. The Liberal's NEP killed us! ERR - False again, the global price of oil falling below $30 a barrel was to blame (though all sane observers currently admit that NEP was dumb). Look Alta4ever. You prattle on about the supposed victim hood of Alberta to the point of sounding like a slave reparationist. You have become what you revile. Frankly, your shtick is even more tiring than that of Quebec separatists. Alberta’s economy remains tied to and elastic commodity. When times are good, Alberta thinks it can rule the world. When times are bad, they blame Quebec. Give it a rest.

I’ve never had much by way of a favourable opinion for the National Post. But still I couldn't believe that they published this screed. “Tell Quebec where to get off”??? I mean really. Is this inflammatory title indicative of mature political discourse? No, both the title and the substance of the editorial (including the manufactured statistics) are the product of a petty, vindictive, ignorant and infantile mind. If you wanted to find a ceremony that approaches an analogous level of offence, you need look no further than the Orangemen’s parade in Belfast. That the author omits this contrarian example suggests a heavy mark of ignorance; wilful or otherwise. But I will not give the author the benefit of ignorance on this score, no. The omission was deliberate because the author carries within his or herself the full tradition of the Orangist movement: the subjugation of the conquered - those whose exclusion justifies the continuation of the Order. I, for one, am sick of it. Sick of this mindset that presupposes that an opinion from Quebec must be contrary to their own; that the emotional lessons of history must be homogeneous; that the answer to grievance is to give new reason to grieve. The distressing part of this whole affair is that the one ceremony that is inarguably the most fitting for this celebratory occasion has had so little exposure: Bury the hatchet on Plains of Abraham

Um, Leafless, don't you think that you've crossed a boundary here in suggesting the French Canadians are not civilized?

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you: Bagdad Bob He had to resurface eventually. We should all be honoured that he chose this forum to reveal himself.

Don is a Calgary native based in Ottawa But don't let facts get in the way.

Mark of a weak argument: met with evidence, reply with insults. The French DID give up on New France. While the colony had always done quite well at defending itself, it was increasingly economically dependent on the mother country throughout its existence. Some of this dependency was born from the fledgling population base, but the main causes were the manufacturing prohibitions imposed by the crown, and simple demographics. From 1713 to 1760, the British colonies had grown to over a million inhabitants. New France counted about 70,000. With British colonials easily outnumbering their French neighbours, the strategic worth of New France had eroded. Indian alliances and small armies would soon be no match to the numbers of British colonials, so it was but a matter of time before the colony was abandoned – as it was in 1763. That being said, I don't like this re-enactment crap any more than I like the idea of an Orangeman’s parade. Sure you can argue that it’s a historical exercise, but the discipline of history has been poorly served in this country. The Plains of Abraham was a meaningless, ineptly fought battle. Why would anyone choose to re-enact it?

This is what passes as democratic dialogue in the Conservative party!?

Hear, hear!

Yup, this is what Duffy said: Duffy duffs Truly, this is a great gig for a guy who was at pains to poorly conceal his Conservative sympathies whilst hosting a national political affairs program. If you’re having difficulties sleeping, read the whole segment and see how he dispenses with any notion of non-partisanship by extolling his conservative pedigree. WARNING! It’s quite nauseating. But I particularly appreciate the pot calling kettle segment above. I mean Mike, I’ll look past the fact that the alliterative opening that you borrowed was coined by a political loser name Agnew, but how you think you can genuinely assail a sitting premier for engaging in personal attacks by you yourself attacking said premier personally is, well, quite hypocritical. That he, an appointed member purportedly representing the people of PEI should suggest that the public position taken by the twice duly elected Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador is somehow unworthy of the population he represents is beyond impudent. It serves to reveal Duffy as the ass he has always been. Beyond that, while it is true that he cannot easily be dismissed from his present post, I would advise him that, in future, he refrain from indulging in his homo-erotic fantasises before any public audience, Senate or otherwise. Such behaviour will only encourage Canadians to opt for the abolishment of the federal government’s institutional answer to pre-senility for public figures.

August, I agree with everything above with the exception of deficits being something we can ignore. Dept and deficits reduce fiscal flexibility and can represent a theft of wealth from future generations if accrued for consumption rather than investment.

Total outlays to the civil service is about 14% of all expenditures (roughly $27 billion). You might shave $500,000 from this without causing much fuss, but once you go beyond that, you start to drastically impair service delivery. Which services are you proposing to cut?

The GST cuts bled the treasury of 10 or 12 billion a year without stimulating any depressed sector of the economy. Harper's cuts fuelled the speculative economy by offering greater rewards to high-end economic activity (i.e., new housing, luxury cars, etc..). "The more you spend, the more your save" was the philosophy in a nutshell. Well guess what? No one is any wealthier from a 2% cut to the GST and many who bought into the speculative model these economic anarchists advanced are now facing a world of hurt. My prediction is that the Tories will be wiped-out in the next election. If held in the summer, they are left with 60 seats; if held in the fall, maybe 30. Harper needed his majority to survive long-term, he didn't get it and now it is only a matter of time before the centre right starts to look at the Liberals to spare them of their pain.

I don't think the Liberals have the luxury of changing leaders. A contest would only sap money and leave the party divided left/centre. No, here the conventional wisdom is simply all wrong. Like it or not, Dion is the Liberal leader and will remain so in the immediate and middle term. But I agree that Harper is a liability on the majority score. He did well in Ontario thanks to vote spliting. But in the shorter run, he has to preside over a serious recession in the coming months. And that just won't play well. Harper is done before Dion. That remains my prediction.

Harper did have the perfect conditions to win a majority, and while he came close, he again failed. But as PM, he could again shift his allegiences and use the federal treasury to favour Charest in anticipation of a provicial contest in Quebec. But that would probably prove to be one flop too many in la belle province. Harper may be the strongest leader amoungst our meek ballot, but that doesn't mean he isn't meek himself. I predict another election in May or June 2009.

Not too late I hope Party - #seats / %vote Cons - 126 / 33.6% Libs - 94 / 30.2% Bloc - 54 / 9.4% NDP - 32 / 19.8% Ind - 2 / 1.5% Green 0 / 5.5%

Bryan, as I noted above, this condition was previously announced (widly in fact). Duffy and CTV will have a heap of problems with the Canadian Hearing Society and CRTC tomorrow.

I know "quite a bit" about banking. Not enough to make translational comparisons mind you, but enough to know that the market collapse, credit squeeze, continuing drop in oil prices and the depreciation of our dollar threatens the ability of our pensions to make scheduled payments. Make no mistake, this sh!t is bad people. Our banks were solid in July, but toxic debt is creeping in (not to mention the ABCP crisis). I wouldn't be surprised to learn 6 months from now that the Ontario Teachers Pension is insolvent. This isn't a recession, this is a meltdown. Easterners have been getting their medicine in small doses for two years now. But Alberta is in for one hell of a shock.

Does this satisfy you: Hear, hear! Sufferers laud Dion I guess it goes to show that you don't keep yourself informed much.

Uh, to all who are getting excited about this “we’re number one” development, there are two things I wish to point out: first, the data used predates this crisis; second, the now bankrupt banking industry of Iceland was in the top ten last year. Canada’s banks were the only ones who failed to transfer the full cut in prime rates as offered by the world’s central banks. Why? 1- They’re greedy 2- They’re in trouble and need more capital 3- They’re ok, but have been asked by the government to preserve capital to cover for pension liquidity problems None of these are happy options. Have you got a happy option? Let’s hear it.

The gift that keeps on giving for the opposition: Big Canadian banks snub Bank of Canada interest rate cuts Two lines of attack here: 1- greedy banks trying to profit from meltdown...PM must stop the greedy basstards. 2- The banks need the 1/4 percent because the PM was misleading us about them being strong Either way, looks bad for Harper.

The self-administered knock-out punch came at the opening of the English language debate when Harper laid into Dion for having "panicked". By this first move, Harper came across as reality avoidant and merely reinforced a sense that he's out of touch. The CPC will still win. But their minority will be significantly weaker. Harper will have lost credibility and his total control over the party. Prediction: Dion outlasts Harper as a party leader

A very interesting look at the ideological dynamic and the inherent costs to each option. Well done.

Oh I'm so sick of seeing this Aesop distortion every time there's an election. First off, this is a creature of the US political scene that has childishly been edited to adapt it to a Canadian audience. Are right-leaning Canadians so unimaginative that they can’t produce their own trite myths? I suppose that in the wake of Harper’s plagiarizing of the Prime Minister of Australia, we can take solace in the fact that it isn’t only the republicans that they get their directions from. Second, the story reeks of patriarchy. Why is the young student female? Because the story doesn’t resonate well if the conflict is between a father and son. A son who exhibits rebellion against the world view of his father is one that was coddled and poorly raised. But daughters, well everyone knows how the “weaker sex” gets silly ideas put into their head and it’s Daddy’s duty to let them know how he knows best. Third, the 4.0 GPA recipient is shown to be anything but smart by so easily falling into her father’s manipulative and incongruent analogy. The aim here is to diminish the value and merits of education because education is the worst enemy of religion – the hostage taker of conservatism. Fourth, the underlying theme of “Father knows best” isn’t conservatism, it’s aristocracy. The discussion is insular; drawing experience and observation within the same social cast and projecting the result beyond. Liberalism, and even socialism, isn’t about rewarding spoiled lazy people who take their social stratum for granted; it’s about ensuring that social stratum is not a necessary determinant for opportunity.

In the event of a tie, the incumbent PM gets first dibs. The situation becomes a little complicated though if he/she failed to win their seat in the election.