Reasons to support Jack Layton/NDP

[maplesyrup]

Canadians have been ruled by elites in our society whether Cons or Libs for way too long. It is time for Joe Average Canadian to take back thier country from the powerful, secretive lobbyists that rule the roost in Ottawa.

Jack Layton walks the talk, he is a real environmentalist in his personal life - he even rides as bicycle to work.

The NDP policies represent the average Joe, and looks out for the less priviledged.

THE NDP is the only party that supports a publically funded, publically delivered health care system.

With the NDP what you see is what you get.

No smokescreens, no deceiving, no twisting into a pretzel to try and con the Canadian voter.

Jack Layton and the NDP believe in Canada, like Canada, and want to improve Canada for all of us.

Jack Layton's New Democrats are bullish on Canada.

[Argus]

Canadians have been ruled by elites in our society whether Cons or Libs for way too long

I agree, of course. However, in my view, the liberal elites are made up of the Liberals and their hangers on in the media, academia and unions. I think Jack is fairly comfortable among that lot.

The NDP policies represent the average Joe, and looks out for the less priviledged.

Yeah, right, as long as the average Joe is gay, disabled, Black and poor. But if you're in the middle class the only thing Jack is going to look out for is how much of your money he can get his claws on. And if you're White and straight the only thing Jack is going to give you is a guilt trip for what a miserable, evil creature you are, and laws to make you be more sensitive and keep you from offending anyone.

THE NDP is the only party that supports a publically funded, publically delivered health care system.

That's BS. THe NDP is, however, probably the only party that believes our present system can continue as is beyond the next ten years without throwing the country into bankruptcy. The NDP never saw a problem which couldn't be easily resolved by simply increasing taxes.

[Alliance Fanatic]

Yeah the NDP's Jack Layton represents the average joe, if you disclude middle class Canadians, and white straight Canadians. Right now I would like to get into the RCMP, guess what my biggest problem with my personal character is. Your a white male, we already have white male's, so you have to get 86% of the test, and a minority has to get 63%. I guess the only people that thinks that is fair are the NDP. Also a majority of Canadian's want terrorists deported from this country, the NDP wants to welcome them, and give them the same rights as me and you.

The NDP also thinks that terrorists are freedom fighters, if they get in then imagine all of the terrorist groups that would be allowed to operate within this country.

By the way if any of you want a government job, and your white, straight, male, forget about it, the NDP believes that white males are the scum of society.

[Sully]

Too bad the NDP was not more family oriented, it might make them think clearer, if they ever got into power they would rack up the debt to idiotic levels to pay for their silly iniatives and programs. As result of this debt and the fact that they are more worried about the present than the future, they would share with their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren a debt that they would never be able to pay off. But that goes for all our kids, and grandkids.

[August1991]

Jack Layton seems to have walked out of a Frank Capra movie:

Jack went to the elementary school located in the Hudson High School building and, in high school became president of the students' council. During the summer he led the youth executive at the Hudson Yacht Club and he was a keen swimmer, training at the Pointe Claire pool and swimming freestyle and butterfly competitively.

Hudson Daily News

Hudson is a very anglo type of place on the way to Ottawa.

[twister]

With the NDP what you see is what you get.

No smokescreens, no deceiving, no twisting into a pretzel to try and con the Canadian voter.

Unless you live in Manitoba where the NDP government promised during the last election to end hallway medicine, improve health care wait times, cut education taxes and balance the budget all of which has not happened.

[Bro]

Vote NDp and give unions free reign to raise their members salary,and the average Joe will be living in the street,because he now can't afford to eat and pay rent due to the cost of everything because of high union wages and demands. Unless he belongs to an NDp union,the average Joe can now just kiss his paycheque away.

[Alliance Fanatic]

Latest Compass poll had the Conservatives at 31%, and Liberals at 39%. The NDP was more than 10% points behind. Hey MS I think that everybody is getting sick of you constantly putting up poll's that make your party look favorable, yet never put up polls that show the NDP is losing popularity. You can't even say whats so good about the New Democrats either. I have went through their policies and pretty well each one blames corporations or American's for all of the worlds problems. The NDP is also left wing, as are the liberals.

[Kliege]

Anyone Remember Bob Rae?

[Stoker]

No it's to my understanding that mad Jack and the NDP are opposed to the American ABM program. Now they claim to be upset because they are against weapons in space. Now were I'm fuzzy on this whole thing is that the American's "interceptor missiles" will be based on land and on ships at sea......So how did Mad Jack make the leap to thinking that the yanks are going to build some kind of deathstar

If the NDP is this confused on just one issue of their's, I'd hate to think how mixed-up they are on all of their issues.......

So tell me (and other Canadians), why should I support a party that is this ignorant to the facts of an issue that it makes a big point of debate over?

[Black Dog]

I know I cry for the long-oppressed white, straight men of this country.

No it's to my understanding that mad Jack and the NDP are opposed to the American ABM program. Now they claim to be upset because they are against weapons in space. Now were I'm fuzzy on this whole thing is that the American's "interceptor missiles" will be based on land and on ships at sea......So how did Mad Jack make the leap to thinking that the yanks are going to build some kind of deathstar

Since this is the only remotely tangible critique of ND policy, I'll address this.

The NDP's concer with the ABM program is that it is the beginning of a renewed bid to weaponize space.

Foreign Affairs critic Alexa McDonough has said: "American documents confirm that [missile defense] is absolutely about the weaponization of space…. It’s a warm-up act.”

Missile defence and the weaponization of space

Apparently, the only person confused here is you.

[Stoker]

The NDP's concer with the ABM program is that it is the beginning of a renewed bid to weaponize space.

Foreign Affairs critic Alexa McDonough has said: "American documents confirm that [missile defense] is absolutely about the weaponization of space…. It’s a warm-up act.”

Missile defence and the weaponization of space

Apparently, the only person confused here is you

I've read your story, but where does it say that space based weapons are a policy of the current administration?

It's says that space based weapons have been talked about in "military circles", but no where in there does it say that if the United States did deploy space based weapons, that Canada would be forced to take part.

Reguardless, if in a generation or two, space based weapons are deployed, why doesn't the NDP want to at least have a seat at the table with the country that will lead the way? And with all that said, it still doesn't change the fact that the current ABM defence plans don't call for space based weapons.......

[Black Dog]

It's says that space based weapons have been talked about in "military circles", but no where in there does it say that if the United States did deploy space based weapons, that Canada would be forced to take part.

So? You wanted clarification on the ND's concerns with the ABM program, and I responded.

This is still an issue, though not a hot one right now. Harper would sign Canada up for the costly, ineffective and wasteful program.

Reguardless, if in a generation or two, space based weapons are deployed, why doesn't the NDP want to at least have a seat at the table with the country that will lead the way? And with all that said, it still doesn't change the fact that the current ABM defence plans don't call for space based weapons.......

First: the NDP opposes the very principle of weaponizing space.

Second: the missile defense program does indeed have a space-based component.

Bush moves toward 'Star Wars' missile defense

[Stoker]

So? You wanted clarification on the ND's concerns with the ABM program, and I responded.

This is still an issue, though not a hot one right now. Harper would sign Canada up for the costly, ineffective and wasteful program.

Though I agree that it will be costly, how is it known that it will be ineffective and wasteful?

First: the NDP opposes the very principle of weaponizing space.

Second: the missile defense program does indeed have a space-based component.

Like I said, if we take part in the program, and if the Americans decide to put weapons in space, who said that we will have to take part?

By reading your link, it seems as if some circles within the U.S government are looking at developing offensive space based weapons in the future........so my question to you is so what? The Americans have offensive nuclear weapons, so does that mean that Canada will have to develop ICBMs because the Americans have them, and would most likely use them in responce to any country that launched missiles at the U.S.?

[August1991]

Jack Layton?

Sorry, but I'm more worried about him losing his day job without the rug:

Layton's Day Job

According to the Dippers, there's enough structural/frictional unemployment. Let's give Layton a break; and pay for his hat.

[CanadaRocks]

Right now I would like to get into the RCMP, guess what my biggest problem with my personal character is. Your a white male, we already have white male's, so you have to get 86% of the test, and a minority has to get 63%

Way I figure it, we should be supporting all members of our society to be able to participate fully, some need more help than others, we should give it.

However.. when it comes to filling a position, the Person best able to do that job should be the one to get it, and the yardstick for that job should be the same for all.

[Argus]

I know I cry for the long-oppressed white, straight men of this country.

Mock it all you want. The fact is that as far as most middle class white males are concerned the NDP is full of people whose lips curl into a sneer at them and their problems, and who think of them as little more than wallets. And because of that the NDP will never get power.

[Black Dog]

Though I agree that it will be costly, how is it known that it will be ineffective and wasteful?

If it doesn't work (and it is a violation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty), then it's ineffective. If it's ineffective and costly, it's wasteful. It's a white elephant, corporate welfare at its worst.

Like I said, if we take part in the program, and if the Americans decide to put weapons in space, who said that we will have to take part?

Stephen Harper for one. Paul Martin has also hinted Canada would sign on.

By reading your link, it seems as if some circles within the U.S government are looking at developing offensive space based weapons in the future........so my question to you is so what? The Americans have offensive nuclear weapons, so does that mean that Canada will have to develop ICBMs because the Americans have them, and would most likely use them in responce to any country that launched missiles at the U.S.?

Weapons in space could lead to a new arms race. As well, the US currently dominates space technology and is seeking to expand that dominance, which I'm sure would suit some people fine, but worries the crap out of others

The fact is that as far as most middle class white males are concerned the NDP is full of people whose lips curl into a sneer at them and their problems, and who think of them as little more than wallets. And because of that the NDP will never get power.

Funny, most NDPers I know are middle class white males. White males are, historically and contemporarily, the most privileged group in our society. Any discrimination they face is but a fraction of what white, male institutions dole out. That doesn't make that discrimination right, but we need to correct the inherent inequalities of our society somehow.

[Stoker]

If it doesn't work (and it is a violation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty), then it's ineffective. If it's ineffective and costly, it's wasteful. It's a white elephant, corporate welfare at its worst.

So can you or the NDP predict the lotto numbers as well?

Stephen Harper for one. Paul Martin has also hinted Canada would sign on

I understand that both Martin and Harper have shown intrest in the ABM program, but I have not heard either say that they were intrested in space based weapons.

Like I said, just because other programs may be developed from technology used in the ABM program (ICBMs or Space based weapons), that does not mean that we have to buy into that technology or for that mater support it.

Weapons in space could lead to a new arms race. As well, the US currently dominates space technology and is seeking to expand that dominance, which I'm sure would suit some people fine, but worries the crap out of others

We (as in the west) have been in the opening stages of an arms race with China for over a decade. Now I for one, wouldn't want to see the United States lose it's lead in military technology to Red China.

Without a doubt in my mind, in a generation or so, when Red China closes the gap/equals the same level of economy as that of the United States, I don't doubt for one minute that we will at the very least be in another Cold War, if not a Hot war with the Chinese.

[Black Dog]

So can you or the NDP predict the lotto numbers as well?

Based on the repeated failures of the program so far, as well as the fact that the greatest threats to U.S. security are not from nuclear capable nations, you can reasonably predict that the program is a waste of time and money.

In the past six years of flight tests, here is what the Pentagon's missile-defense agency has demonstrated: A missile can hit another missile in mid-air as long as a) the operators know exactly where the target missile has come from and where it's going; the target missile is flying at a slower-than-normal speed; c) it's transmitting a special beam that exaggerates its radar signature, thus making it easier to track; d) only one target missile has been launched; and e) the "attack" happens in daylight.

Beyond that, the program's managers know nothing—in part because they have never run a test that goes beyond this heavily scripted (it would not be too strong to call it "rigged") scenario.

...

There is, in other words, a vast distance between the Pentagon's current level of testing and the level that would need to be done before anyone could begin to claim that a missile-defense system might shoot down real enemy missiles in a real nuclear attack.

The latest annual report by Thomas Christie, the Pentagon's director of operational testing and evaluation, reveals just how incalculably vast this distance is. (The report was published with no fanfare at the end of last year and has appeared on private Web sites—but not the Pentagon's—in the past two weeks.)

Christie's bottom line is that we're rushing into this thing blind. Assessments of the system's capabilities are based primarily on "modeling and simulations" or on canned tests of "components and sub-systems," not on "operational tests of a mature, integrated system." Nothing can be reliably inferred from these data, because we don't know enough about the actual system that might be built and, therefore, don't know whether it bears any resemblance to the simulations. Or, as Christie puts it: "Due to the immature nature of the systems they emulate, models and simulations cannot be adequately validated at this time."

Link.

Like I said, just because other programs may be developed from technology used in the ABM program (ICBMs or Space based weapons), that does not mean that we have to buy into that technology or for that mater support it.

No, we don't have to support it. But we should be concerned, given our role in North America's air defense command.

We (as in the west) have been in the opening stages of an arms race with China for over a decade. Now I for one, wouldn't want to see the United States lose it's lead in military technology to Red China.

Without a doubt in my mind, in a generation or so, when Red China closes the gap/equals the same level of economy as that of the United States, I don't doubt for one minute that we will at the very least be in another Cold War, if not a Hot war with the Chinese.

I don't think another Cold War is necessarily a bad thing, as it would check the U.S.'s current fetish for empire building.

Any way you slic eit, though, abrogating treaties you signed on to in good faith sets a very bad precedent for others to follow.

[Stoker]

Based on the repeated failures of the program so far, as well as the fact that the greatest threats to U.S. security are not from nuclear capable nations, you can reasonably predict that the program is a waste of time and money.

So there were not repeated failures with, say the US manned spaceflight program in the early 60s?

As for the "greatest threat to the U.S.", right now I tend to agree with you, in that I believe and I assume that you also believe that terroism is the greatess threat to the U.S., but is that mostly by default?

Other then China (and Russia if you want to count them), no nations as of yet a ICBMs that can reach the United States, but thats not to say rouge nations are not developing missiles and that they won't have them in the future.

Me thinks it's called planning for the future

No, we don't have to support it. But we should be concerned, given our role in North America's air defense command.

I'd become more concerned if Canada was not looking at potentail future threats to North America......

I don't think another Cold War is necessarily a bad thing, as it would check the U.S.'s current fetish for empire building.

Any way you slic eit, though, abrogating treaties you signed on to in good faith sets a very bad precedent for others to follow.

I don't see how a future Cold War will "check U.S. empire building", if the United States does go forward with ABM defence and any possable "spin-offs" that come from ABM research......