I miss Reagan
-
Posts
1,033 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by I miss Reagan
-
-
I have only this to say:
I believe media tend to lean in one direction or another. Canada's key problem is that most of the media we hear about NATIONALLY comes out of Toronto.
As a result, many national stories about Health Care or social programs tend to begin with the assumption that our social programs are all good and to be cherished and protected. This is the prevailing attitude in Toronto and accepted as a truism.
This is why the Libs have such a stronghold in Toronto and therefore Canada. The Liberals identify themselves with Canada's social programs more so than any other party (Trudeau anyone?).
Good point and very well put Jerry.
-
He'll be remembered as the dithering PM who thought Canadian soldiers once stormed the beach at "Norway".
(and Canadians call Bush a moron
) -
On our forum.
In Canada.
Newbie.
Desperately looking for Harper quotes
Desperately trying to connect
In Canada.
I'm not making this up.
So refute them. Your leader can't.
Why would anyone want to refute them, they're great comments!
-
In fact, the media is composed of thousands if not tens of thousands of individuals, each expressing their own particular view of the situation. (Heck, think of this forum.)
I disagree August. I think quite often one news organization, manager, or reporter will lead off on something and the rest of them jump on the band wagon so as to not miss out on a potential story. I also believe the media has a tendency to spin the the leftist view into a more positive light. That being said for whatever reason, the media, (aside from the CBC) seems to be completely favouring the Conservatives. I feel like the the huge turn around point in this campaign was caused by the media. Although I agree with Kimmy's points, to some extent I think the media is handing this win to Harper. One might think I'd be happy about that being a big Harper fan but I'm not at all comfortable with the media deciding who runs the country. I think we should put more restrictions on the press around election time and perhaps limit the publicity of polls.
-
If you have read any of the threads, TM12, you will kniw that my experience of Quebec politics and its issues goes deeper than anyone you could read on the forum. My involvement extended to being the Vice President of a small purpose founded political party in Quebec.
It wouldn't be a little organization called Option Canada would it?
And tell me, how deep does the rabbit hole go Eureka? I gotta tell ya just reading your post gave me goosebumps. I can almost hear the X-Files music playing....
-
Well, I've never been (officially) a student at the UofA, and I've never really considered myself a Conservative, or even a conservative (although some people here seem to think I am just a little to the right of Ann Coulter, for some reason.) What I am most definitely is pro-change, and Harper is the only realistic option. I'm extremely pleased with how he's doing this time out, and cautiously optimistic (though still expecting the proverbial "other shoe" to drop. )
Kimmy you are truly an enigma.
I agree I too am waiting for the other shoe to drop. Perhaps the media will dig up something in the next couple weeks to help the Libs out.
-
I don't see a problem.
That is the problem!
The conservatives can be as negative as they want and it is OK, but should a liberal even disagree with them, the Liberal is doing the "scary, scary, scary" BS.
What a double standard.
Can you imagine how easy it will be for them to justify everything, with that kind of mentality?
That's insane, it's the other way around. Where have you been the past three elections?
-
Hands in my pocket. Hands in my pocket. Hands in my pocket. just to make sure everybody knows, the "Hands In My Pocket" ad is for a credit card company, not a Conservitive Attack ad!
-kimmy
{any similarities between banks that have their Hands In Your Pocket and the Liberal Party of Canada are purely unintentional.}
Kimmy are you still Conservative? Last time I was around the Belinda incident really had you questioning things. Did you graduate and get away from the leftism at U of A?
-
I guess I worry about the innocents. In the U.S., for example, there were 802 accidental firearms deaths in 2001 (bound to be higher now). To me that's a good enough reason for concern and alarm. http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUT...NS/GUNSTAT.html
I'm not a fan of guns but I don't like the "accidental deaths" argument. How many people die from car accidents? No one wants to ban cars.
There was a good 20/20 on last weekend. It claimed 2/3's of shootings are by people protecting themselves.
-
I certainly don't hate Harper (don't even know him). But I do think he's moderating his image and suppressing his personal political opinions in order to get elected. But that's just politics, not cause for hatred.
But as for him, I'm not convinced he has anything but contempt for humanity in general.
Contempt for humanity?
Maybe he just has contempt for idiots.
Though I can understand how there'd be little difference for you.
Well I heard in his spare time he kills kittens and rapes puppy dogs...
-
IMR,
Fairly simple explanation, and it render's Mclean's quote below merely cheap rhetoric.Ya I don't understand the insanity of the constant re-election of the Liberals.The best explanation I got was from a Macleans article a while back which described Canadians as willing partners in their own self-deception.Canada is 'centrist', (more so than other countries) and the liberal party is the central one. Canada has a small population, relatively, especially for 'first world' countries, but is 'modern' and secular. There are only 3 major political parties(that could feasably have a PM), with the cons on the right 33%, the ndp on the left 33%, and the liberals managing to play the middle card up until now. It could be said, that from aside from the corruption, that they are still there. The middle 33% are the most important 'bloc' of voters, so the left or right 33% have to bend a little, as Harper is appearing to do, to enter that 'middle ground', and have a strong party and leader. Neither the Cons nor the NDP had these things for the last couple of elections.
This time around, however, the election is probably the most interesting one in since the Mulroney/Campbell sh*tkicking.
Ya I've always felt that having the NDP around makes the Libs appear moderate. But what the article was refering to was all of the lies and promises the Liberals tend to make right around election time that everyone knows they won't keep yet they still vote them in. And would add to that the corruption and arrogance. I hate to say it but I'd take the NDP over the Libs, even though the NDP would sink the country.
-
Anyone have a pulse on where she stands right now in her riding? I know the Cons haven't put a lot into beating her. Have to agree with Gerry Nichol's top ten list. She is one person I'd love to see lose.
-
Welcome back IMR we missed you!
Where were these same PM lovers when he did his elaborate smear campaign on Harper in the last election?
Was all of that just fine??? SCARY SCARY CONSERVATIVES!!
F**king Hypocrits!
Hi Leader. Ya I don't understand the insanity of the constant re-election of the Liberals. The best explanation I got was from a Macleans article a while back which described Canadians as willing partners in their own self-deception.
-
Responsible to who? himself? It's a 100% privately held company! You libs are a real laugh.
Hey! You're starting to get the hang of this Free Enterprise thing, aren't you?
Adam Smith wrote that when a business operates with the profit motive all citizens benefit. Any supporter of capitalism would recognize this as being the way things should work. . . that is. . . unless they were just trying to smear someone. 
Gosh I missed that chapter where it says one should encourage high taxation while himself evading those same high taxes he imposes on his people.
p.s. I wouldn't classify myself as a "lib," although I am considering voting Liberal this election. This will be the ninth federal election that I'm participating in as a voter and I have voted conservative every time but twice.This is why I say lib and not Lib.
-
It's totally hypocritical.
Actually, it's responsible. The goal of a corporation is to earn as much money as possible for the owners of the company. That's what he was doing. This is just another empty smear.
Responsible to who? himself? It's a 100% privately held company! You libs are a real laugh. -
It is a perfectly acceptable practice in the shipping industry.
Perhaps but not when you're the leader of a country responsible for trying to attract business to this country and when you're the one responsible for the high taxes. It's totally hypocritical. Just like he talks about the evils of private health care when he himself uses a private health clinic.
-
Good to see you back again, IMR. I have missed kicking you around. However, why the same old nonsense? One might have hoped you used the time to open up a few brain cells to fresh thinking.
Glad you missed me old pal. Remember I'm conservative, I've been working. Somebody's gotta make the money to support you socialists. Careful though, you guys keep up that tough talk and us money makers just might leave the table and you'll be stuck with the bill
In short, I think the regional identities in Canada are pretty weak and don't come anywhere near the sense of the Canadian nation or the sense of nation that exists other countries like the US or among French Quebequers.I don't know Sparhawk, that's seems to be the case in Ontario but you tell that to people in Newfoundland. I think Ontario is in this bubble where they see everyone in Canada loving them and so greatful to be united with them. I think you overestimate the strength of Canadian patriotism. Like we've discussed, there is much depth to it. BTW did you watch the behavior of our Canadian fans booing the US kids as the played Russia?
Just like I am pretty sure that Texas independence would likely be talked about if the democrats had control of the presidency, congress and the senate for 12 years.I don't think you are right but your question points out the superiority of the US system to ours. It's much more balanced. You don't see one party or even worse one leader for 12 years. Once a party gets too arrogant and too much control, like the Repubs have now, there is always a shift to balance things out like we'll see in the next mid-term elections. The states also have more autonomy on divisive issues. The individual states can decide on the death penalty, gun laws, gay marriage. They aren't dictated to, to the same degree we are as provinces.
-
The American States were taxed far less than citizens in their Home country. The new taxes were for the defense of America which Britain had been carrying the whole shot for to that point.
You must have learned that in the same class that taught you Canadians are taxed the same as Americans
America did not separate because of taxation (with or without representation). The States "separated" becuase its elite were ambitious and greedy - just loke elite Albertans and Quebeckers.Looks like it payed off eh. America has done quite well since then...
As always, the merchant and landowning class of America wanted a free ride.Really? That American Revolution was a pretty rough "free ride". Maybe you should read about how easy that "ride" was.
I am beginning to think I have been wrong about Canadian unity and the reason is Alberta's oil.That oil resource greedily kept to itself is disupting the economy of the whole country. It is the source of inflationary pressures; of a too high Canadian dollar; of the declining Ontario manufacturing sector; of the increasing difficulty in selling some of the resources of other provinces.
Not much changes around here eh. That oil sure is evil isn't it.
Perhaps Canada should kick Alberta out now instead of subsidizing it with the jobs and livelihood of many in other provinces. Then, when Alberta falls to the "Dutch disease" and collapses economically, we can not take it back unless it is on territorial terms or simply laugh. when Alberta runs out of water - as it will - we should not divert streams from neighbouring sources - but tell ot to drink its oil and bathe in the tar.Now you're kinda gettin the idea, but you don't need to be so vengeful... Come on give peace a chance.
-
I think Canadians suffer from 'rich kid' syndrome. They have never had to fight for what they have can so they take it for granted. When someone complains it often has more to do with the bad attitude of the complainer than with the thing being complained about.
I agree with that. Canadians complain about everything and want everything for free.
I hate to admit it but knee-jerk separtists bother me. The kind that angrily call in to the radio shows immediately after any Liberal victory screaming "it's time for Alberta to separate!!" with out thinking it through. That's part of the complaining culture. (Although in the end I'd take support for separation anywhere it came from.)
Not really, the US colonies were 'colonies' and did not have a right to elect MPs that satDo you think if the US colonies were given elected MPs it would've made an impact on the Revolution? I don't think it would have. Besides we feel like we are in a similar situation. We aren't happy with our own democratic deficit in the Senate, PMO, Surpreme Court... etc. etc. I can't say we feel like we have much of a say in Ottawa. Of course when we question that the answer that always come back is "well vote Liberal then"
More or less exactly what the US federal gov't does. I use the US as a comparison because it has a very similar federal structure and society yet does not seem to suffer from the same regional tensions. It is important to ask why there is a difference.The US spends a good share on pork but IMO they have a lot more to show for a lot less taxation. For instance a great interstate highway system, a solid national defence, the most powerful and technically advanced military in the world providing jobs for hundreds of thousands of people, the most advanced space program in the world, vast amount of humanitarian aid provided to the world, and a fantastic national park system. And despite the Canadian propeganda the US has the most technically advanced medical system in the world including medicaid for the poorest segment of the population. The US also manages to better protect the environment than Canada does. So where the hell does all of our money go? I don't think I need to repeat the litany of boondogles and scandles that our system of government promotes.
I actually agree that this country needs to go back to the model of the original confederation where the federal gov't only raised the taxes that were necessary for the programs that it was responsible for. I think that would address all of the tensions that exist today - no need to break the country up.Wishful thinking. Our system doesn not promote meaningful reform. It promotes government which will only do what is required to maintain power.
Our the regions of this country have nothing in common except our love of hockey and the created hatred of the US. There is very little reason other than emotion for us to remain united. The sooner we realize how miserable this marriage is the better for all of us... except maybe the our colonial masters in Ontario.
-
Chump change. How about the 70+ million the Gomery Inquiry is costing taxpayers? Who's going to pay that back?
Exactly why would we want to spend money on fighting crime! What a waste of money! That money could have been better spent on something like the gun registry.
-
Are you people so dumb that you can't grasp the very specific differences between the cases? I guess so.
Hey Black Dog is that any way to treat an old friend?
-
The sooner we can get Quebec out the door the sooner the West will be on it's way as well.
You have misunderstood, your assumption that I see this as desirable is incorrect.
My choice would be that Canada remain intact as it is now.
But I have come to the realization that retaining the status quo is not mine to choose. Quebec will soon have the opportunity to choose, and if I were to bet - I'd bet they will leave.
The purpose of my post was to speculate on what happens after that, and to note that in those circumstances - a Canada composed of Ontario and eight much smaller provinces - that the status quo most emphatically will not be accepatble to any of the provinces excepting of course- Ontario.
And what I am saying is that in this hypothetic situation there is no way the West would remain in that situation which is why I'd like it. If Quebec goes Alberta goes soon after.
Sorry it was me who was not clear.
-
The union works as well as, if not better, than the US. The only difference is unlike the US, Canada has created a culture where people obsess about their regional identity and look for cop out solutions like seperation instead of actually trying to resolve the differences.This union simply does not work. I'm not sure why people even want Alberta to remain a part of Canada.As others have noted: most of the royalties from Texas and Alaska oil go to the federal government yet you do not hear Texans and Alaskans whining about breaking up the US. I think it is because Americans are more mature that Canadians when it comes to this issue and realize that breaking up a country solves absolutely nothing.
I think you should ask yourself why, if the US system is inferior to ours, do we always compare ourselves to the US? I never brought up the US. Even Jack Layton uses the US in comparisons. Perhaps we're in denial. Nevertheless you ask a good question that I have thought about. I think it outlines the Eastern misconception about why we in Alberta are so discontented. You Easterners think we want to leave because we have resources, because we want to hoard the spoils for ourselves. It simply isn't true. For me there are many more reasons than the fact that the East wants to take our money. So back to the question of Alaska and Texas. Perhaps they get more out of the union than they give, not necessarily in monetary terms. I think you're right in that the culture is different. They've fought very hard for what they have and they believe strongly in their system. Not to mention they already separated from over taxing tyrants back in 1776. (That little event nixes your theory about 'breaking up a country solves nothing')
Let me ask you how staying together as a country solves anything? Our Federal Government really has no function but to tax and find pork to spend the money on. It's not like they are taking seriously the traditional roles of Federal governments such as sovereignty and defence. All the Feds do are tax us and impose laws on us that harm us. And as for staying together for trade pursposes I think it's obvious in the cases of softwood and mad cow B.C. and Alberta would've been much better without the undiplomatic help of Chretien and Martin.
-
BD give this a read. At least you'll like the source...
Typical Black Dog.Carter does it: Good
Clinton does it: Good
Bush does it: Bad.
That's good.
What Harper really believes
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
hey newbie..... BOO!