waldo
-
Posts
17,650 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by waldo
-
-
Oh my! From today’s Citizen – by Gerry Nicholls, former vice-president of the right-wing National Citizens Coalition… vice-president to then president Steve:
Oh yes - so much for the notion of fiscal conservatism!
If Mr. Ignatieff says jump, Mr. Harper will say how high on his way up. Kowtowing, by the way, is remarkably easy if you have no guiding principles.Just look at how readily and eagerly the prime minister enacted a Liberal-pleasing budget that went against everything Conservatives are supposed to stand for.And don't kid yourself, that budget was not about kick-starting the economy or providing a fiscal stimulus or fighting the recession -- it was about one thing and one thing only, ensuring the Tories keep power. This is why we can expect the Tories to introduce more Liberal-pleasing initiatives in the weeks and months ahead.Eventually, of course, when it suits his timetable, Mr. Ignatieff will force an election which Mr. Harper will likely lose. So the Tories who jettisoned their principles for power, will ultimately end up with neither. -
If he's such a smart guy why does have such problems speaking when he doesn't have a prepard speech in hand. I doubt he's any smarter then GW Bush. He has been given a media "holiday" he was a walking gaffe machine during the primaries but it wasn't reported. At a rally in the midwest he said that he had been to just about all "57" states. I like to know when those 7 states were accepted into the republic? He has said a great number of other very stupid things, but the media is in lov with him and do feel the need to focus on his mistakes like they do for conservatives.
As was said before I highly doubt he is any smarter then any other president.
ha! you doubt Obama's any smarter than the frat-boy Shrub? I'm surprised anyone - anyone - has the temerity to throw that one out!
suggest you don't follow American politics much as Obama has shown Clinton like abilities to speak eloquently, unscripted - "off-the-cuff"
but really, how Palinesque of you - that 57 states thingee has been so dealt with. How frivolous. But just for you - after lengthy travel, days-on-end, the actual quote from a tired Obama reads:
"Because, you know, it is just wonderful to be back in Oregon, and over the last 15 months we've traveled to every corner of the United States. I've now been in fifty .... seven states? I think, one left to go. One left to go. Alaska and Hawaii I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it."so, of course, a guy who spent all those years living in Hawaii, with it's statehood number/significance, wouldn't actually know the number of U.S. states. In any case, he was talking about the continental states (the 48 contiguous states) and mistakenly started off with the "fifty" reference... then a lengthy pause... then the "seven" reference, followed by twice stating "one more to go". That would be 47... with one more to go... that's the 48 continental/contiguous states. He follows up with reference to the 2 non-continental U.S. states - Alaska & Hawaii. Hey! That's 50!!!
has Obama actually made verbal gaffes? - of course. Will he make more in the future - of course. We can be sure that when it happens there will be plenty of GOP wingnuts... and, apparently, Alberta good ole boys... waiting in the wings in an attempt to embarrass, gain favour, or -
-
pardon!
As Harper = Bush And Obama != Bush
Then
Harper != Obama
$primeMinister = Harper;
$president = Obama;
if ($primeMinister != $president) {
echo 'Harper is Harper and Bush is no longer President. Time for you to get a new line, or better yet, stop dragging American politicians into Canadian politics.';
}
# include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
int count;
for (count = 1; count <= 500; count++)
printf (“Harper = Bush is always apropos, particularly as it grates on the CONS”);
printf (“Jean Chretien is no longer PM. Time for you to get a new handle”);
printf (“Someone else dragged in the American politician and gleefully trumpeted
Harper was he”… time for you to direct your consternation elsewhere”);
return 0;
}
-
Given that Harper and Obama are not that ideologically apart...
pardon!
As Harper = Bush And Obama != Bush
Then
Harper != Obama
-
I am betting that stock [stockwell Day] is smarter and more politically adept then you anyway.
do you share your hero Stockwell Day's assertion that the Flinstones is a documentary?
-
much has been said about the false economies of Alberta's debt-free status - on Klein's fiscal mismanagement... admitting his government had no plan to manage the tarsands development. At a time of lower costs, when they should have been building up/back the provincial infrastructure, reducing debt was the order of the day... and now, of course, world economies have tanked and $40 a barrel oil has the Alberta government teetering on deficit.
as before, a province with little diversification, beholding to a non-renewable resource and a world working to offload it's own dependencies.
will a 'have' province of today - be a 'have-not' province of tomorrow?
Alberta has no debt and no deficit. Alberta also has a giant pot of money they can dip into in times like this.
$40 dollar oil is still profitable, they do still have downhole rigs there. Albertan's have the lowest taxes in Canada and one of the most business friendly tax policies on the continent.
Quebec has ports, minerals, and a large amount of hydro potential, Ontario has a large amount of minerals, manufacturing, and population. Why can't those two provinces balance their books with the advantages they have?
The success of Alberta is proof positive of the poison that socialism is.
again, you ignore the false economies of the ill timed Klein debt reduction. At a time when costs were lower and manpower was available, Klein was fixated on the Alberta debt. When the boom hit, infrastructure costs skyrocketed to the point initiatives had to be deferred - and, of course, labor shortages were everywhere.
those contingency and heritage funds are much criticized for their small sizes - small relative to the tremendous amount of oil revenues coming into the province, particularly at $140 barrel oil. Don't feel to smug about what you describe as that "giant pot of money":
blueblood's giant pot may yet need to be tapped!
by the way - do you have trouble sleeping with that socialism boogeyman under your bed?
-
We're a country that belongs to the old world but with an address in the new one. We're a country with enormous opportunity, and a compassionate generous people who are willing to do what they can for those who need help at home and around the world. We're a country where freedom is protected by a constitution that guarantees equality for all people. We're a country with a diverse economy led by our abundant natural resources and our still very strong manufacturing sector. We're a country that is built on diversity and the idea that people of all stripes can live here and get along. Those people can take a great satisfaction in living in the country and enjoying such freedom and prosperity. We're a country built not out of war, but out of compromise...the spirit and idea of that compromise continues to this day in everything that we do.
I could go on, and on, and on. This country has an identity. It's a symbol to other countries of what is possible if you simply decide to put down your arms and talk things through. I can't think of another identity that I would rather this country have.
a most worthy commentary - certainly, the Canadian identity/ideals are admired throughout the world
-
How about lets shut off the tap and people can follow AB's example and balance their budgets on their own.
much has been said about the false economies of Alberta's debt-free status - on Klein's fiscal mismanagement... admitting his government had no plan to manage the tarsands development. At a time of lower costs, when they should have been building up/back the provincial infrastructure, reducing debt was the order of the day... and now, of course, world economies have tanked and $40 a barrel oil has the Alberta government teetering on deficit.
as before, a province with little diversification, beholding to a non-renewable resource and a world working to offload it's own dependencies.
will a 'have' province of today - be a 'have-not' province of tomorrow?
-
SK and AB want nuclear power for the oil sands/prov. grid. These provinces don't have the hydro capacity that MB and BC have. It's a real pain in the ass to get a reactor up and running. Why does Ontario get to have one and not out West?
say what?
Bruce Power, the Alberta company fronting the initial application to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) pulled it's own application given raised concerns from the target Peace River area (apparently, too close to an aquifer)... the company continues to gain local consensus on a second site and when realized intends to re-submit. The CNSC had already reviewed the initial submission and was waiting on the Bruce Power to submit project descriptions.
the Alberta government's described expert panel has not yet released it's long awaited report on the pros and cons of nuclear power in Alberta oh, the alienation of it all!
-
Well, at last a post with a civil tone! I was beginning to wonder if you are a different person using the same alias.
Anyhow, allow me to reiterate. I don't live in the West. I just have had the opportunity to read some of the history and be exposed to many Western Canadian views.
You don't have to convince me. The danger comes from the millions of people that live there becoming more intent on separation.
I have taken note of your hyper-sensitivity - should there be an opportunity to dialogue in the future I will certainly attempt to accommodate your acuteness
even accepting to your postured hypothetical `danger`, there are not millions in the West bordering on separation intent - that intent lies in the hearts and minds of a very small lunatic fringe. If you dare reference that lone much-ballyhooed Western Standard poll, I'll shred you a new one... wait, recognizing your sensitivities, I suggest if you reference that much beaten upon poll, you and I will certainly discuss further.
-
Waldo... 'percieved'... makes nice rhetoric, but the transgressions are very real, and so is the alienation.
perceived - dated, no first hand understanding of... hence, inferred - hence, perceived
transgressions - in the dated context (listen to Manning - in the past - move-on... giddy-up)
alienation - the trumped up specious fall-back go-to of a blustering few
-
in the spirit of your kumbaya big-tent inclusiveness I would hope you could elaborate further on the reasons for that so-called Alberta “alienation” – their, as you say, “high sensitivities”. Seriously, let’s open up that same earlier request I made to you. Just the top 5 – today, relative to other provinces, just how is Alberta so hard done by… what uniquely sets the Alberta alienation apart? And yes – NEP has been milked to death – it was 30 years ago, notwithstanding accepted analysis that suggests the perceived impacts had other significant domestic/global contributors.
I see it gets better – how was the Liberal/NDP Coalition a, as you say, “total kick in the head to Western Canadians”?
Those were just two after a quick google on the West and the Coalition.Here's some on Western alienation:We start with Sir John A MacDonald imposing discriminatory freight rates and tariffs that favoured Central Canada and locked the Prairies out of manufacturing and into a grain economy that favoured the East. Later we see the NEP. In the 90's we see the 'Salmon War' off B.C. where the feds left the west coast fishing industry high and dry till finally the fishermen there took an American ferry hostage for 3 days.There's also Quebec favouritism under the Equalization Act. Let's not forget Mulroney and his awarding of the CF-18 maintenance contract to Quebec when the best and best priced bid came from Manitoba, an act that ignited the flame that was the fledgling Reform Party.I like this one:When Martin was campaigning in 2004, in his visits to the West was an often repeated statement that his leadership would be a failure if Western angst were not cured. However as his fortunes in the polls sank he reverted to Alberta bashing as a means to protect eastern seats. The political reality was he may gain 1 seat by playing to western interests, but he could gain 10 seats in Ontario by casting himself as a protector of a national health system against the vile Alberta government.That's enough to get started. Before you just blow it off (likely in a snide manner, it would appear) you might keep in mind that it's not enough to convince me. You have to convince the majority of Western Canadians!Go ahead, scold them too! Tell them their feelings are old news!That oughta work REAL good!The Coalition related question to you was a request to substantiate your statement that the Coalition was, as you stated, “a total kick in the head to Western Canadians”.
I quit reading your 2nd West/Coalition link when the author assigned a “coup designation” to the Coalition. Your 1st West/Coalition link would have us associate that Western Canadian head-kicking to the masterful Conservative party manipulation, falsely decrying the Coalition as played out in the Conservative terminology of the day… unconstitutional, coup, illegitimate, illegal, separatist leaning. An article offering a collection of quotes from Conservative MPs and energy sector insiders framed within this shameful Conservative party manipulation – that’s your substantiation?
The focus of the so-called alienation, as presented, was Alberta… extending that to a broad-based Western alienation is certainly your prerogative – as is ignoring Molly’s several suggestions that there is uniqueness to Alberta’s monopolitic… and by extension, its degree of presumed alienation; one not played out to the same level in other Western provinces.
You were chided about offering up the 30 year passed NEP to substantiate today’s, again, perceived alienation – so, of course, you jump in the way-wayback machine to substantiate alienation.
But let me help you out. To me, a Preston Manning quote cuts to the meat of this so-called Western alienation:
“True, such historic complaints as inequitable freight rates, tariffs and federal resource policies were distinguishing features of western alienation in the past. But these kinds of grievances are not the essence of the discontents of the New West of the 21st century. Today, the New West is big and strong enough to address many regional concerns itself, thank you. No, today the essence of western frustration with Ottawa and the federal system is rooted much more in frustrated aspirations than unaddressed grievances.”Yes – frustrated aspirations. A current economic big stick, “might-is-right”, mentality forced to reconcile it’s frustration against the reality of Canada’s population centers and traditional economic engine base.
Far too many appear to project that frustrated aspirations position in the form of bleating off about past perceived transgressions. Manning also offered up his thoughts on how best to “work the system” to advance the “cause”… unfortunately, that takes work, reconciliation, accommodation and “bridge-building” (Manning’s phrase). Apparently, far too many would rather bleat on, look to the distant past, ripple discord and even pronounce separation as a panacea.
-
Sheepishly? There you go again! You aren't merely pointing out an ideological difference. You are being demeaning, if not rude! You sound like a poster on "rubble.ca".
I've known many Albertans for years. Sensitivities with an appreciable number of them ARE that high! Given what they've had to put up with for literally decades, it is a logical resentment.
Albertans do not vote Tory because they are sheep. They do so because Liberals consistently demonstrated over the years that they didn't give a damn for the West except as a 'wallet'. You've implied in some of your posts that that's old news and they should just get over it.
What a trite thing to say, considering just weeks ago the Liberals were signing a coalition agreement that was a total kick in the head to Western Canadians! Old news? Hardly! It's more like the same old news, every day, that never changes.
If you ever run for politics I suggest you stay local. Your ideas don't sound like a 'big tent' approach.
in the spirit of your kumbaya big-tent inclusiveness I would hope you could elaborate further on the reasons for that so-called Alberta “alienation” – their, as you say, “high sensitivities”. Seriously, let’s open up that same earlier request I made to you. Just the top 5 – today, relative to other provinces, just how is Alberta so hard done by… what uniquely sets the Alberta alienation apart? And yes – NEP has been milked to death – it was 30 years ago, notwithstanding accepted analysis that suggests the perceived impacts had other significant domestic/global contributors.
I see it gets better – how was the Liberal/NDP Coalition a, as you say, “total kick in the head to Western Canadians”?
-
Wow, you really know how to make Albertans feel better! How does one answer all the issues that have given them such hard feelings over the years? Easy! Just mock and scold them!
You ought to change your alias to "Mr. Canadian Unity"!
I doubt if you'd give a Quebecois poster the same hard time.
oh please – continually playing the trumped up alienation card from a province that sheepishly votes provincially/federally as a Conservative block, election after election after election.
surely sensitivities can’t be that heightened to the point where ideological distinctions elicit claims of fostering disunity.
Its because Ottawa doesn't listen, even when supposedly the PM is one of ours.I really could use some schooling here – please learn me. Just how is Alberta so hard done by compared to other provinces? Really, it should be so easy to itemize since it’s apparently a ready go-to for you. No biggee, just the top, oh say, half-dozen alienation drivers that uniquely set Alberta apart from the rest of the country. Wait – just the top 5 will do as we’ve already heard that Harper (as stated, one of theirs) doesn’t listen – although it’s not clear exactly what Harper isn’t listening to.
-
wasn't removed just no increases in funding to provinces.
typing slower... fund your described "socialist agenda" (see 2009 Harper "Conservative" budget)
-
There is no way to improve it, just remove it. If you can't fund your own socalist agenda, do expect my hard work to do it for you.
no problem - see 2009 Harper Conservative budget
-
If he was for Alberta first he would not have approved that budget. Alberta first would have meant listening to his base, which a great portion of it is Alberta.
now I think I'm beginning to get it. That Alberta alienation you spoke of - it's cause Harper doesn't listen.
-
No we wanted to reduce the transfer payments out you dumb son of. We weren't asking for more money back just less out of ours going out the doors.
You smug we may not be a have province always but even when we struggled we got nothing after you pricks raped us with NEP, we had to balance our own budget while paying for you when that non renewable resouce was worth next to nothing. We don't want a handout from Canada thats your stick, you want others to solve your problems for you. We Have had to do solve problems you created for us before, we can solve our problems when they happen, so take your smug nanny state and shove it.
not sure why you continue to struggle with simplistic terminology. To “improve” equalization transfers either send less or receive more. As I said, “The point remains you're clamoring for anything to help "improve" Alberta's equalization transfers - as is Danny Williams.”
you mistakenly interpret smugness – really, the discussion forum format doesn’t always translate well – does it? Inflection, body language, tone – all missing. I will grant you that it appears Albertan's have a real penchant for pulling out that NEP boogeyman, no matter how many generations back. Remember... not smug.
-
nice (attempted) deflection. The point remains you're clamoring for anything to help "improve" Alberta's equalization transfers - as is Danny Williams. Yes, double standard.
nice swagger indeed. That you should presume on always being a "have province" is very close-minded, very myopic indeed. You're a one-trick province balanced on the non-renewable resource beam without any semblance of real diversification to keep you in that "have" category long-term - long term when (finally) the world turns away from fossil fuels... which really won't be that far away. Don't worry - unless you've actually gone and built that firewall, you can feel comforted that Canada will look after you in your "have not" days.
-
The end of Canadian conservatism - How Harper sold out to save himself
-
The firewall was about protecting Albertan's from alienation and abuse by the eastern provinces, our wallets aren't yours.
Self serving is wanting to have your federal transfer payments increased even though you are now a have province.
BIG Difference.
so – you state that Harper firewall would have protected you from alienation and abuse. Interesting, although perhaps you could elaborate on how the opting out from the Canada Pension Plan, the collecting of personal income tax, the creation of a provincial police force and the assuming of health-care policy… how any of that Harper firewall verbosity, can be realistically substantiated as a response to perceived abuse – or alienation (to whatever).
which leaves us the Harper firewall tax-and-transfer nugget – you know, improving the equalization in Alberta’s favour. Hey now – wait a minute – how can you rail against Danny Williams for calling for the same thing that you so unabashedly accept as Alberta “protection”.
I guess you are just too stupid to see the difference though.notwithstanding your brazen double-standard, my personal sensitivities are not shaken by the stoopid label – I will attribute your lapse in decorum to your perceived slight and hyper-sensitivity, which I trust, is not an all encompassing Alberta trait.
-
So exercising constitutional rights that 2 provinces in Canada already exercise is self serving. The firewall was about protecting Albertans from alienaton and abuse by the eastern provinces, our wallets aren't yours.
Self serving is wanting to have your federal trasferpayments increased even though you are now a have province.
BIG Difference.
do you feel your firewall champion has been helping your so-called alienation... your so-called abuse? How's that workin out for ya?
-
Naw we wanted to stop the exploting of Alberta tax payers for buying off the east, danny wants his entitlements back big difference.
no, no, no... self-serving provincial gain balanced against federal interests
-
I will as long as they have that Premier who has an idenity crisis. He seems to think he is a PQ or Bloc politician.
hmmm... do ya think he got a hold of Harper's firewall letter?
Federal government will run a $34-billion deficit in 2009?
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
nothing new here - move along