Oleg Bach Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 Senator Bach.....................I like the sound of that. But I wouldn't want the job - sounds like selling your soul for a bit of cash - a comfortable mind numbing existance - nope - I would rather be poor..then spend time in that gloomy town of Ottawa...You would think they would have given the grey place a paint job - or moved it to Toronto where it belongs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 Now you're getting the picture dobs. Next election the Tories will have a majority. That will last three to four years into 2011 or 12. Canada needed change, Harper represents that change. Can't you just be happy we have a PM who has Canadians best interests at heart? And even in 2011 or 2012 according to your timetable, there will not be changes in the Senate unless Harper opens the Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 And even in 2011 or 2012 according to your timetable, there will not be changes in the Senate unless Harper opens the Constitution. Yes several senators will retire in 2011. More appointments and voila the Tories control the senate. Once that happens we can do something else for the good of Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 Because now he can say that if I don';t get a majority, these guys will form a coalition and bully parliament into having a PM that you didn't vote for. Propped up by the separtists who will have veto power.Don't forget 60% of Canada was against a coalition. They just announced the closure of a huge amount of auto plants. Harper can kiss the Ontario vote good by when December numbers are give out and Ontario drops 100 000 jobs easy. No majority unless he does it in Quebec which wont happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 (edited) They just announced the closure of a huge amount of auto plants. Harper can kiss the Ontario vote good by when December numbers are give out and Ontario drops 100 000 jobs easy. No majority unless he does it in Quebec which wont happen. So now it's Harpers fault Canadians aren't buying domestic autos? Uhhh...yeah...ok. Me and my wife both drive domestic autos, we're doing our part to help out. Are you doing that, if you drive of coarse. Edited December 12, 2008 by Mr.Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 Yes several senators will retire in 2011. More appointments and voila the Tories control the senate. Once that happens we can do something else for the good of Canada. I think you are incorrect. Even if every appointment from now till 2012 is Conservative, it still won't mean more Tory Senators than the Liberal ones. And it still won't mean a triple E Senate because it isn't the Senate that is holding up those changes but the amending formula. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 So now it's Harpers fault Canadians aren't buying domestic autos? Uhhh...yeah...ok. It does not matter who's fault it is. He is going to get the blame if he dose not bail them out and if he does the east coast and west will blame him for doing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 I think you are incorrect. Even if every appointment from now till 2012 is Conservative, it still won't mean more Tory Senators than the Liberal ones. And it still won't mean a triple E Senate because it isn't the Senate that is holding up those changes but the amending formula. Jdobbin, with all due respect and I do respect you, yes there will be. There are currently 20 Tories in the senate, 38 aftyer the appointments, 12 more next year and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 (edited) Jdobbin, with all due respect and I do respect you, yes there will be. There are currently 20 Tories in the senate, 38 aftyer the appointments, 12 more next year and so on. More Tory Senators seem to be up for retirement than Liberal ones in the years you mention. I don't know that they will have more Tories than Liberals in 2011. And of course this assumes that Harper is re-elected and wishes to make one Conservative Senate appointment after the other. Edited December 12, 2008 by jdobbin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 More Tory Senators seem to be up for retirement than Liberal ones in the years you mention. I don't know that they will have more Tories than Liberals in 2011. And of course this assumes that Harper is re-elected and wishes to make one Conservative Senate appointment after the other. There was a write up in today's Toronto Sun saying their would be. If it's in the Sun it's gotta be true Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 There was a write up in today's Toronto Sun saying their would be. If it's in the Sun it's gotta be true Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 Link? Dang, I just went and looked through it and couldn't find it but I know I read it or heard it someplace on TV or the papers, I read most of them everyday. I remeber most everything too, this is bugging me. When I find it I'll post it but it was put into a medium somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 Dang, I just went and looked through it and couldn't find it but I know I read it or heard it someplace on TV or the papers, I read most of them everyday. I remeber most everything too, this is bugging me. When I find it I'll post it but it was put into a medium somewhere. It does not matter Harper is going to be in for a fight over the next year and he is going to lose power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted December 12, 2008 Report Share Posted December 12, 2008 It does not matter Harper is going to be in for a fight over the next year and he is going to lose power. Keep dreaming. I wager dollars to donuts we go to the polls in January and witness the tory war room operating at full steam ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 Keep dreaming. I wager dollars to donuts we go to the polls in January and witness the tory war room operating at full steam ahead. I can't see harper not giving Canadian a good budget because he knows we are watching and he knows the other 3 parties will bring him down. If we do it will Harper calling one and he doesn't seem to care about the tax dollars being spent on elections, it could back fire on him with people's anger at the pollls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 (edited) New Senators will cost a bundle according to NDP. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081212/...l/senators_cost Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision to fill 18 vacancies in the Senate before Christmas is expected to cost Canadian taxpayers up to $9 million in annual salaries and other costs.Government figures, and research by the New Democratic Party, both indicate that leaving the seats empty would save between about $8 million and $9 million a year. New Democrat MP Thomas Mulcair said the savings would be even greater by eliminating the Senate entirely. "The NDP's longstanding position is it's a vestigial organ that can be removed without harming the body," he said. Edited December 13, 2008 by jdobbin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 New Senators will cost a bundle according to NDP.http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081212/...l/senators_cost Harper could save us 9 million and more by not filling them, if that 30 million was sooooo important in the economic update why is this different? I trust the NDP on this one they don't got any horses in the race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
democrassy Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 New Senators will cost a bundle according to NDP.http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081212/...l/senators_cost Why worry about spending - Canada has run a surplus for ....er....thats right, Conservatives are the biggest spending government in history of the country and will run a deficit for the first time in over 10 years chaching - billions in GST cut for votes ....chaching - billions spent catering to provinces espec. Quebec for votes....chaching - billions in strategic spending announcements before last election for you guessed it...votes(not that Libs didn't do that but these guys were supposed to be different) hmmm... green fog, wavering picture ...imagine how we could have been a shining star in the industrialized world if we hadn't made inefficient GST cuts, catered to provinces, election spending ... Canada... a beacon for fiscal conservatism wake-up ...back to the future... senate ... millions... whatever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 Stop the poor from smoking - noble in deed. Charge them in tax 12 dollars a day to smoke..but say that you have made the cost higher to save the poor from smoking.Then they invent...cheap smokes for the poor to keep them wired.. At the same time they point at the natives, saying they are robing the feds. Here is the clincher..they cover up the smokes with blinders - that forces the consumer to request verbally his brand...and by doing so the victim addicted grants consent to the drug - giving the dope peddler an out in litigation...stupid! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 Stop the poor from smoking - noble in deed. Charge them in tax 12 dollars a day to smoke..but say that you have made the cost higher to save the poor from smoking.Then they invent...cheap smokes for the poor to keep them wired.. At the same time they point at the natives, saying they are robing the feds. Here is the clincher..they cover up the smokes with blinders - that forces the consumer to request verbally his brand...and by doing so the victim addicted grants consent to the drug - giving the dope peddler an out in litigation...stupid! What is the price of tea in China anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 So your are admitting that the whole thing is totally corrupt - and you are willing to continue to participate? Not much for your character. Do you really believe that this corrupt and insidous elite will reward you? There is a primary rule amongst the rulers - If you can not remain loyal to your own country men - then how the hell are will you ever be truely loyal to your crimminal bosses...they loath your type. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 Speculation on who might be given a job in the Senate. http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/552559 With the clock ticking down to Tory's self-imposed Dec. 31 deadline to find a vacant riding that he can contest in a by-election, attention is centred on the possibility a Progressive Conservative MPP could be offered a Senate seat by Stephen Harper.Tory called that "speculative" yesterday and said he hadn't been asked to submit any possible names. "It's a hypothetical question," he told reporters. Observers said the most likely Senate candidate would be veteran Progressive Conservative MPP Bob Runciman, a former cabinet minister and supporter of an elected Senate who is from the party's right wing. "I'd give it serious consideration," a smiling Runciman said yesterday, adding he had not been contacted by the Prime Minister's Office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 He means he has not been contracted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcqueen625 Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 Instead of appointing more useless party hacks to that retirement home in Ottawa, they should either completely abolish the Senate or elect it's members through equal representation from each province and territory, to specific terms in office, and to term limits. Politicians both federal and provincial should also be subject to term limits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcqueen625 Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 (edited) Elizabeth May? What has she ever done to warrant a Senate seat, and what has she ever accomplished that qualifies her in any way to hold a Senate seat, aside from having a big mouth and few brain cells? Oh sorry, I forgot, she is likely as qualified as most of those presently occupying seats in the Senate. Edited December 13, 2008 by mcqueen625 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.