kengs333

The Liberals got 42% of the vote--that's not the majority.

Where did he say this? You're telling me this guy spent the last weeks incessantly posting about the election and he didn't even bother to vote?

We keep it because it is the best form of government devised.

Yes, absolutely. Monarchs are educated and bound by a sense of duty to an extent that far exceeds that of any elected Head-of-State. The Monarch's sole purpose is to govern; elected Head-of-States simply take on the role of leadership temporarily, and in many cases attain their position because they represent certain interests rather than have the necessary qualifications. Look at the United States and the presidents that it has elected--spoiled sons, mediocre actors and peanut farmers... Do you really think so? I highly doubt it.

You see, even John Manley doesn't understand what he's talking about, yet look at the positions that he's held in Canadian government... No republican can make an argument against the monarchy without making false, misleading or inaccurate statements.

There is no reason for "ending the monarchy in Canada". Absolutely none.

I don't see the relevance. My response was in relation to the comment that voters are always right. Were the Germans who voted for Hitler right?

I believe I've stated on a number of occasions that I don't deny what Europeans have done; I don't have an idealized concept of Europeans or European history. Idealized, however, is what one can say about your interpretation of Indian history. You steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that Indians also behaved barberously and murderously both in their dealings with Europeans and people of their "own race". So objectivity is certainly something is lacking on your side. And let's not forget when it comes to "academics" that you made it clear you had no intention of consulting academic reports about Indian settlement patterns in southern Ontario, archaelogical evidence of Indian practices such as cannibalism. This victimization of Indians--when in fact Indians were equal players in the political and military struggle for the continent (which they eventually lost)--only perpetuates the problems of the past; it solves nothing. If you are going to do this sort of thing, it's only right that you admit that Indians were responsible for much suffering and bloodshed.

I think if and when the United States' economy implodes, Canada may experience a period of economic instability, but after a slight adjustment, things will continue to thrive. Canada is nowhere near as dependent on the United States as you would like to believe.

Until you can demonstrate that you have competancy in the English language and can formulate sentences properly, I see no reason to believe that you have much more of an understanding about anything than I do. Her Royal Majesty The Queen of Canada is a Canadian citizen and, by definition, this makes her a "foreigner" NOT.

Just more proof that republicans are cranks.

Actually, that's not correct. The person that was interviewed for the news report was told that the error could not be changed and she and her neighbours would have to drive to Milton.

I've already explained on this thread why disgruntled PC supporters would most likely vote for the Greens, and again, I think your placement of the Greens in the political spectrum as left of the NDP is based more on your stilted ideological outlook rather than reality. For a moment there, your post was sounding somewhat respectable, but then you just had to add in "hemp wearing granola types" didn't you. Is this an attempt to get under my skin, or just stupidity? I don't know. Whatever the case, it gets a little tiring after awhile having to deal with people like you. Try keeping things reasoned, or don't waste my time.

I actually didn't vote Green as I had intended. Partially because of the fact that there was a more conservative alternative in my riding, partially because I can't vote for a party that embraces pot smoking r----ds as candidates.

The votes came from the Liberals and PC, not the NDP which increased its share of the popular vote. I think if a survey is done of Green supporters, those that traditionally voted non-GP largely would have come from the PCs.

All of those parties exist(ed) because, as I said, "group of people with a different perspective on issues [plural, not singular]". A "single-issue" party would be something like "Abolish the GST Party" or "Build a New Hospital in My Riding Party".

The way you talk about it--"other issues is simply plastered on rhetoric"--every political party in Canada, then, is a "single-issue" party. (Doesn't the PCs exist simply to preserve the status quo for Big Business and elites?) The issues that I list may mostly be interconnected, but that doesn't mean that the Green Party is any more a "single-issue" party than any of the other major parties; that's the reality of life. Everything in this world is connected. People who run for and vote for the Green Party don't spend their days in tree houses only worrying about the environment, pollution and ignore everything else. They're concerned about every issue under the sun, be it crime, healthcare, education, the economy. These concerns have always been reflected in the Green Party platform, and haven't just been tacked on for greater voter appeal. Whatever the case, the Green Party has shown once again that it is a legitimate political force in the province and won't be going away any time soon. Too bad, eh?

Nice way to treat an ally--infringe on its sovereignty and break international law in the process. Guess it shouldn't come as a huge surprise. And you people wonder why Canadians don't care much for Americans... Let's see... China, you guys need it too desperately, China. I would gladly see Canada withdraw from NAFTA. Our primary trading partner should be Europe, anyway, but Asia will also do fine. The United States economy is starting to be something of a drag on Canada. Canada doesn't really need "US capital investment"--that can easily be acquired elsewhere and probably at a better advantage to Canada. Have fun spending your devaluing dollar...

Perhaps you should know what you're talking about before you comment on Canada's government. The Queen is not "foreign"--Her Royal Majesty is the Queen of Canada and as such is Canadian, not a foreigner.

Yeah, let's start dealing with the facts now, unlike before the referendum when the NO side was just spewing total bs? Every time that I heard MMP discussed in the mainstream media, they always made it out like nobody got it. It was too confusing, etc. So either the media was making this up to influence people who were unsure about MMP, or they were accurately reporting what the majority of people were thinking. Which do you chose (I hope the choices aren't "too confusing"). The fact of the matter is that the concept of MMP is not all that difficult; and it is a proven system. So the fact that the majority of Ontarians didn't get it speaks for itself. Incidently, 36.85% is closer to 40% than it is 33.33%.

In all of the discussion that I've been privy to on Green Party policy, this issue has never been addressed so crassly as it is by the OP. My local Green Party candidate, to my knowledge, has never raised this as an issue. It really is a side issue for the party; it has much more important issues to focus on. The fact of the matter is that the OP is a recent convert, is simply using the party to further his already proven failed agenda. I really hope that the party will do something about this soon.

McGuinty really seems to be letting it get to his head. Last night he was first to make his speech, and this morning he was at times a little too conceited.

You do know that "democracy is local" is a contradictory phrase. Democracy stands for the rule of the people/masses, not the rule of the local representatives, most of whom receive less than 50% of the vote in their riding. Our system dates back to pre-Confederation days when only qualified males could vote; the system was designed to maintain status quo by denying provincial-wide movements/sentiments from being duly represented, leaving governance in the hands of local wealthy elites. Actually, 8/100 is a significant number. The fact that you would consider the political wishes of 8/100 voters in this province as insignificant really speaks volumes. People who are truly democratically minded respect the views of all people who participate in the process. Does that include Germany in 1933? Pakistan in 2007?

Again you're talking from a perspective of wishful thinking and political unsophistication. Categorizing things based on your own stilted political ideology rather than trying to look at issues from an objective manner doesn't accomplish much in a political discussion. Political parties arise largely because there are a group of people with a different perspective on issues, not because they want to push a "single-issue". The Green Party emerged because there were a number of people who had a similar belief that a party had to exist that addressed a number of different issues from a different perspective, namely that the environment, a healthy environment, was the key unifying factor; issues included--pollutions, climate, overfishing/whaling, animal species extinction, deforestation, oragnic agriculture, animal rights, women's rights, Native rights, minoritiy rights, preventative healthcare, anti-Capitalism, etc. etc. These were ALL issues that have been part of the Green Party's platform from its beginning. The idea that it is a "single-issue party" is a gross misconception, and the fact that you insist that this is the case only looks bad on you.

The YES side got closer to 40% which is in the same range as the Liberal popular vote. How ironic that 40% qualifies a party to hold a large majority in legislature, but denies Ontarians a truely democratic electoral system. One has to assume that the people who voted YES were much more informed and politically sophisticated than those who voted NO. Democracy allows every adult citizen in a society to vote, which is good, but can also be bad at times. A number of factors influence people in voting the way they do, and often it comes down to fear, ideology, whims and indifference.