playfullfellow

I am new to these discussion forums and I find them rather interesting. I am trying to learn the ins and outs but reading both sides of the spectrum gives me clues as to how rhings work. I have always enjoyed a good discussion as long as it does not lead to baby face name calling. To those that take a discussion seriously and are willing to look at all sides of an argument...........cheers to ya.

The NDP would love to see our relations with the US blown to hell. The US represents everything they hate. As for Layton actually having the kahoneys to think that he can dictate to the US how they should run their own country, I think he will be in for a very unpleasant surprise. He will get spanked and sent home with a tear in his eye.

Gun control is a farse, this law only effectively made 1000's of honest Canadians criminals. It is a law that most police will not even enforce because it is ridiculous. Heck, prosecutors won't even prosecute people who are turned in by friends as havig a non-registered gun in their homes. If this law was serious, why have natives been excluded from having to register their guns? Beisides, legitimate gunowners don't have anything to hide, criminals do but in all reality, do you think a criminal will register his gun before going to rob a bank? I doubt it very much. This country was not being overrun with gun touting screaming lunatics before this law was enacted. I think harsher sentences for criminals who use a weapon during the commission of a crime would benefit the public more. There are plenty of other programs too that could have the fat trimmed off of them. Funding for the CBC, funding to starving artists, funding to special rights groups and the list keeps going and going.

Yep, real scary essay MS, he should be hung and burned in effigy for promoting "family values" in an essay. What could he ever have been thinking? This kind of scare mongering just doesn't cut it anymore.

Hmmmmmmmmm, I kind of think of myself as a conservative and according to your train of thought, you just called me a liar. I haven't really seen anything yet that would suggest the Conservatives are going to do away with our health care system. Touching the health care system is as good as sudden death in this country. Each party has their own idea on how it should be run but fundamentally, no party is brave or stupid enough to deny Canadians decent health care. The health care system surely needs to be tweaked to improve efficiency whether this is done by more money or by getting rid of the fat cats and wasting money. Just keep in mind that Martin was the one that cut the transfer funds to the provinces, even the provinces which can not afford the rising costs, yet Mr. Martin insists that the provinces can afford to pay for their own health care costs through increasing provincial taxes. Sounds like passing the buck to me and not accepting the blame for his cuts to the system.

My lord, did Harper steal a girlfriend or something from you at one time? Give it a break. Just because he is not a mud slinging, loud mouthed point the finger at others type of politician does not mean he is a bad politician. You know hwat I hear when I hear "Team Martin", I hear another dictatorship, another 4 years of one person controling what happens in this country. Yep, Martin has experience, he was good enough to create tax laws that benefitted his own company, he was good enough to help line the pockets of his backers and he cut any investigations going on short before they came to his back door. I do not feel that Martin will do very well in the debates, he gets flustered too easily when faced with the unknown. Martin will sling mud, rant and rave about social morality but if Harper and LAyton can throw the unknown in there, they will fluster him and he will get thrown off balance. Like it or not, Layton and Harper will have to tag team this one. Maybe Martin can come up with another top 10 list, the last one went over very well. Then again, the top 10 list is someone elses idea and not very original.

You got me curious to see where you were headed with this August and did some reading last night, despite being an illiterate western redneck like some people seem to imply in here. When I noticed that Desmarais was a campaign backer of Mulroney, Chretien and now Martin, I think I see where you are headed. Desmarais is a power maker and has the power and money to get the Prime Minister he wants (very simplistic ciew). It seems to me, at least since Mulroney anyways, if Desmarais did not back them, they failed to retain power for very long. It could be measured in months and days. After reading several different sites and papers, I could find no reference to Harper meeting Desmarais unless it was during seminars or such. If we are on the same wave length, then you raise a very interesting point that Desmarais is a behind the scenes man and can make or break a political career.

In a very simplistic view, the Federal government is not totally responsible for trade with the US. It is individual companies that have to look after their own trade. The Federal government can basically only help our own companies by ensuring the borders stay open to our products. In turn, we play a game of give and take. Unfortunately, we end up giving more often than getting but on the other hand, we are dealing with our closest neighbour and one of the largest economies in the world. Without federal subsidies, we can not compete in the European economy because of their subsidies and trade barriers. As for a lot of the other economies around the world, they deal mostly in credit, what good is that to us? I think the government in general should help us promote our products around the world but it is up to the business people to get the contracts. As for the original path of this thread, I think Harper has some of the same ideas as Reagan but Reagan was one of a kind. Like him or not, Reagan was not a push over and did what he felt was right for the US. I think Harper also wants to do what is right for Canada. Harper wants to make Canada a stronger country again and increase our national pride. I think Harper is one of a kind too and only time will tell if he will be allowed to see his vision for Canada through. Maybe we could find a comparison for Martin, I think one of the 3 Stooges might apply quite appropiately or the Artful Dodger from Oliver, a slick little pickpocket. I wont even go anywhere near who I think Layton is like for the fear of getting ripped a new one by his followers in this forum, that much of a sense of humour is not around this place.

Alomost looks like some of that dicrimalized BC pot at work here.

We aren't allowed to speak up for things that we might feel are morally wrong anymore. If you speak about lieing being wrong, then you may be painted as a religious bible thumping fanatic. Morality is slowly being outlawed on the high road to political correctness.

Let's see some evidence of this hidden agenda please. Hmmmmmmmm maybe it is hidden very well and you can not find it. Or is it because that Mr. Harper comes from a religious background that there absolutely has to be a hidden agenda. Mr Harpers 58 billion is also small compared to what the other parties propose to spend and where will they get the money? So in other words we can look forward to more scandals, wasted money and useless propaganda programs that make fat cat Liberal suck ups richer? Mr. Martin is not the leader he proclaimed to be and will lose control of the party much the same way as Stockwell did. So, I advice you to read your own advice on thinking about the leader you would want to run this country. Do you really want a leader that uses tax evasion rules to his advantage? Buys votes from Quebec through various agencies? Shuts down investigations before they are complete or get to the truth? Limit the powers of the Auditor General so more scandals don't come to the surface? So, in all essance, who has the hidden agenda? It may not be a hidden agenda but the Liberals certainly have more to hide than any other party and it is in their best interest to retain power so the books do not get opened up. So I urge you to show this hidden agenda. I am an open minded person and will listen to reason and definate evidence. Facts and evidence talk so show me the evidence.

Allowing everyone the freedom to say what they want in public is a very scary proposition. We have enacted laws that ban this sort of behavior such as Arian Nation rantings and such. As for people who want to deny the holocaust, they have obviously never been to one of the concentration camps and felt the evil that still emiates from those horrible places. They have also not perused the thousands of pictures that show the starvation and death plus the mass graves in these camps. These people are basically anti-Jew and Judaism is protected under the charter as freedom of religion. Arian nations have tried this approach of trying to start Arian nation churches but this guise has failed also. They still promote hatred which is not allowed. The problem with a lot of radical groups is they also promote violence against whatever group they hate be it a religious group or a group of colour skinned people. We as a nation can not allow this sort of behaviour. We are all allowed to have our opinions but when we start to promote hatred, then we need to draw the line. I may not agree with the gay lifestyle, this does not grant me the right to encourage beating gay people up or promoting hatred towards them because they are different than me but I am still allowed to have my own opinion on the matter. I hate to say it but having too many freedoms leads to chaos. The main reasons we have rules is keep order. Even the most pre-historic societies had rules that stipulated what behavivior was allowed. Anytime society has allowed hatred towards one group or another, it has lead to the downfall of that society. Romans against Christians, Jews against Christians, Christians against Jews, NAZI's against Jews and so forth. I can have my opinion on certain matters and am allowed to debate my opinion. If my debate sways people to my way of thinking then so be it but I should be open minded enough view other peoples opinions as being viable and respect their views. I can not however condone hatred towards a certain group of people. Even though I do not agree with certain groups and their choices does not mean I hate these people, I simply do not agree with them.

Because he is a person that still sticks to his personal beliefs. As very clearly stated, it would be a free vote on these issues, majority rules. It would be up to the constituents to tell their MP's which way to vote on these matters. I have no problem seeing these sorts of bills get voted on as long as it is a free vote, not the current dictatorship style voting we have now. All votes shoulld be free votes.

A very simplistic view is that our laws are already based on the 10 commandments. We as a society have just allowed the lawyers to expand them a hundred fold to the point of not being able to understand them ourselves. We as a society believe we can always make things better by complicating the hell out of everything.

Lets look at this from another angle here. We all know you are pissed at conservatives and boomers takeanumber, thats your choice. Now lets look at these tax cuts, all they really do is put a few extra bucks in the pockets of every person that pays taxes. Now being as society is, will we put this money away for a rainy day? Probably not, we are a society that likes to spend our money. Now we go out and spend this money, generally on consumer goods. This money is put right back into circulation as income for other people, who in turn pay taxes on this money they earned. If they keep the trend going to spend any money they got to keep because of tax cuts. Now I also seem to recall that some of the tax breaks being discussed were also beneficial to military families, which you evidently are from. Now maybe another way is for people to invest these tax cuts into an educational fund for their kids. Now does that not make more sense. I do not feel morally obligated to pay for a person to get a BA in the study of foot fungus amongst horned toads or something like that. I have no problem with having affordable education for people but do I need to pay for inane subjects? Subjects like this are for professional students and they should pay their own way. I would look at an education as an investment in my future just like the money I have to invest each year in equipment for my job. Another factor over the generations are wage levels, they have increased with each generation, hense things cost more, like an education because decent instructors also feel they should make more money. I pay my taxes each month and I dont really mind as long as the money is well spent. Now we will have different views what to spend that money on but that is a fact of life, people have different views. I try to look at a topic from everyones point of view but the argument you are using is not new. Every generation since the 60's has had similar points of view and so far I think they have had a pretty decent life once they get into the world and start making a living. I grew up in a low income, immigrant family that had to struggle to make ends meet. Do I bitch about the struggles we had? Nope, I just work harder to make sure that my kids have a better life than I did, that is what each generation does for their kids.

WTF, all I ever said was let the people decide and now we are talking about genocide. Where the hell did the common sense go? Right out the bloody window from the looks of it. And WTF is the ECHO generation, something that just keeps repeating the same words over and over I guess. Yeah I am white, conservative and an immigrant. I have seen the ovens and concentration camps and that is a part of history that should never be repeated again. I couldn't give a flying fig what colour a person is, it is what's in the heart that counts and what a person does with their heart. The kind of rhetoric you are spewing is right along the same lines as the hatred you seem to be speaking out against. Give your head a shake, Canada is one of the best countries in the world to live in because we have freedom of choice and to be a voice.

Martin is right, he definately needs new writers. The only one that even remotely was a wee bit humorous was the, hmmmmmmmm I stand corrected, they all sucked sewer gas. I get a better laugh out of seeing Martins speeches about how the Liberals will change under his leadership, now that is a joke.

Nice work MS, glad to see someone has some free time on the weekends to seek out info This is not a poke or jab at you MS, some of us poor saps have to keep working through the weekends to keep the boss happy. Saved me a ton of time reading through endless reports and going buggy eyed. Any poll that shows the Liberals losing support is a good poll.

I read through the article, didn't see any relation to them stating the country should be run like a business. I think that if put to a referendum, official bilingualism would be phased out. Let each individual province decide which or any other language would best suit their needs. I do not see this as an attack on the French but rather diversifying each regions needs. Let's let the reguar Canadian Joe decide whether we should spend a sack full of money on official bilingualism.

MS, at this point I think that if Layton suggested we shave our heads, wear pink speedos and tattoo "I'm with stupid" on our foreheads, you would think it a good idea. Quebec seperation is not an issue in this election and for the most part, I think the clarity act is fine. At least it defines exactly what a seperatist party has to achieve to gain seperation from the rest of Canada. This is only a case of sucking up to the seperatists trying to gain votes. I wonder if Layton would feel the same way if Alberta seperatism was an issue in this election, which it is not but the sentiment is there. I doubt that Layton would feel the same way because many of his tax increases would affect a lot of people and companies based in Alberta and he would need this money to fullfill his promises.

It is as with many things during an election, a case of mudding slinging. The Liberals scream foul, the NDP scream fact and the Cons keep quiet on this one. This is generally the case for each mud ball thrown during the election. We as Canadians and due to the Liberals previous election tactics have become used to it so we are not shocked anymore. Sure it may gain or lose a vote or 2 but generally people will see through the muck. I figure LAyton should have re-worded his statement and it may have had a much more positive effect rather than basically calling Martin a murderer. Layton is falling to the same level as the Liberals on this.

I agree with this statement that in most cases, collecting EI has become next to impossible. Luckily, I have never had to go through the beaurocratic BS of trying to apply for EI but I do know several people that have damn near starved to death waiting to get EI. People pay for their EI and should be able to use it when the need arises. I also feel that our EI premiums should be regressive for people who do not use it. Why should I always pay the same rate (just an example) for 19 years and have never had to use it? I could pay into EI for 30 years and am still only able to collect for the same amount of time as someone who has paid into it for 1 year. It would seem a little more fair that say after 5 years of not collecting, my premiums should drop. What scares me the most of having a rather large surplus in the EI account, some politician someday will have a brain fart and figure they should use this money somewhere else. That would really piss me off as I am sure it would others. This is the workers security against starvation during hard times.

I guess just because a person is religious, supports family values and is a conservartive, they have a hidden agenda. That is what your threads alude to and does not make a whole lot of sense to me. Where is the proof of this hidden agenda? Please do show because I would love to see it, oh yeah, it is a hidden agenda. I don't really think there is much of a hidden agenda from any of the parties anymore. We as voters can be as well informed as we want to be now a days and scrutinize everything a politician does or says. It is guaranteed that any faux pas by the Liberals or Conservatives is posted by MS 5 minutes after they do so. (not picking on you MS but you are quite quick to post things and always provide links to new news). If you look at the leader profiles and history, you will notice that Harper and Layton are the only two who have a strong history in economics. Both have taught economics in schools. Martin was a lawyer. Now I don't know about the rest of you but I am less inclined to let a lawyer run this country than I am a person with strong economic skills. Lawyers are just too good at the double speak. So it boils down to what type of economics you want to see happen in this country and which party has the better vision to pull of their agendas, the visible ones that is. You will also have to decide what you, as a tax payer is willing to pay for in the long run. Are the Liberals heading for a minority government? I think the possibility is very real and growing each day. We have 3 green leaders for this election and too many Liberal scandals for them to have a cake walk again. But the liberals will just start to sling the mud again tp try and confuse the issues, only this time, Layton will also be a target after his comments about Martin being responsible for the death of homeless people. Though it may be true in a round about way, I think it was a bad move by Layton because now the Liberal muck slingers will be gunning for him too.

Read the article MS. Saw a lot of words like increase predict, estimate and new spending. The new spending amounts to an increase of 79 billion dollars. With their predicted uncollected (no definate numbers listed here) taxes and increased taxes (taxes coming from the rich and companies we work for), we get a total of 18 billion recovered. So that means there is a further 61 billion over 5 years to come up with or 12.2 billion dollars per year. Now, Layton has stated where he intends to get some of the money he intends to spend but I do not see where he is going to come up with the other 61 billion? The only other alternative I see is taxing the middle class again. I see nothing of debt reduction, nothing about exactly where this 61 billion is going to go aside from healthcare. Ooooppppppssss, sorry, I forgot to mention extra childcare benefits that I seem to have read somewhere but there were no definative numbers. IMO, this looks like a whole bunch of vote buying and promises that may be very hard to keep. I would certainly like to see more definate numbers and a lot less predicted numbers, this is an election and not a seance.

I am more than capable of judging what me kids can or can't watch on tv, btw, never did mention asking for tv censorship. My personal opinion is that some violence in movies and video games have gone way overboard but I do not allow this sort of crap in my house. I pick and chose which movies my family gets to watch. Please elaborate on which communities this would have ramifications on? you could just as easily apply this to people shoving their values about other groups (homosexuals, disabled people, minorities) down your throat too. Or should we not protect all groups because they may or may not have had bad parents too?