Harper's Tea Party NORTH?

[Wild Bill]

Puritanism could be a winner

Something very interesting was said at the end of the article, eyeball. Here it is:

"What’s happened this past decade is that Quebec has lost its long-time leverage. No one cares much about its priorities now that the separatist blackmail threat, the sword of Damocles, has been removed."

Perhaps I should start this as a thread on its own. There's much truth to this idea. When so many seats are gobbled up by the BQ it effectively dilutes Quebec's power in Parliament. I mean, who cares? The BQ is a one note pony and you always know what they will stand for. There is limited reason for the other parties to try to woo Quebec voters in such a situation. Might as well concentrate on other areas of the country where there are votes to be had!

[Jack Weber]

Union leaders have a lot of clout, in that they have access to their membership's union dues to work for or against local candidates. I worked 13 years for the Public Service Alliance of Canada in Ottawa and I have seen how it works. Union members had zilch to say about it but at the workplace, shop stewards (a breeding ground for future union leadership) pushed the NDP platform.

Possibly in the public sector unions...

I know at my union meetings,someone put a motion that the Local should support the local NDP candidate...It got shot down...

It's kinda hard to tell a unionized auto worker that makes over 100 grand a year that he should support a switch to green technology,gay rights,and,anti-Israeli policies because it's good for his/her conscience.And it's not like the NDP have done alot to stem the neoliberal economic tide of the last 30 years..The NDP simply does'nt bring the union vote in any appreciable numbers that would give them power...

It's a canard...

[Wild Bill]

Possibly in the public sector unions...

I know at my union meetings,someone put a motion that the Local should support the local NDP candidate...It got shot down...

It's kinda hard to tell a unionized auto worker that makes over 100 grand a year that he should support a switch to green technology,gay rights,and,anti-Israeli policies because it's good for his/her conscience.And it's not like the NDP have done alot to stem the neoliberal economic tide of the last 30 years..The NDP simply does'nt bring the union vote in any appreciable numbers that would give them power...

It's a canard...

Quite right, Jack! My father worked for Stelco and he often told me how every election the shop stewards would start thumping the NDP drum. After a while the other guys would find this so obnoxious they would threaten to beat the twerps up! Then things would quiet down.

The NDP might have been more successful if they had stuck to just issues of importance to the union workers but they always have to take stands on fringe social engineering issues and foreign politics that either bore private sector union workers or are dramatically different from their working man's values. The average auto worker isn't an anti-semite and unless he's gay himself couldn't care less about gay rights, one way or the other. He's not necessarily anti-anything! Just not that interested.

[Jack Weber]

Quite right, Jack! My father worked for Stelco and he often told me how every election the shop stewards would start thumping the NDP drum. After a while the other guys would find this so obnoxious they would threaten to beat the twerps up! Then things would quiet down.

The NDP might have been more successful if they had stuck to just issues of importance to the union workers but they always have to take stands on fringe social engineering issues and foreign politics that either bore private sector union workers or are dramatically different from their working man's values. The average auto worker isn't an anti-semite and unless he's gay himself couldn't care less about gay rights, one way or the other. He's not necessarily anti-anything! Just not that interested.

Both my Grandfathers and my Dad worked at Stelco,and he said the same thing...The 1005 Big Wigs would start telling guys how to vote and the membership would tell them to eff off and worry about the next contract and the current workplace.

And your right about the modern NDP...They might be more relevent to the middle class if they had stuck to Tommy Douglas social democracy.Most of the vote for the NDP comes from the student,environmental,and,social/poverty groups.The only organized labour groups that support the NDP now are the public sector unions,the USWA,the UFCW,and,some of the CAW.But that's in name only..Who's to say what a rank and file member would vote?And even if that were the case,the union vote has never given the NDP the power it might have had if the union vote actually voted en masse...

By the way...How do you like Hamilton City Council and it's wonderful vote earlier this week???

I don't know who I dislike worse...

Hamilton City Hall

or

Lord Bobby-Cat...

[Wild Bill]

By the way...How do you like Hamilton City Council and it's wonderful vote earlier this week???

I don't know who I dislike worse...

Hamilton City Hall

or

Lord Bobby-Cat...

Well, I'm ashamed I voted for Fred! Essentially, he's backed Bob Young into a corner. Bob seems to believe that unless he gets a good location he will lose money on the Cats forever. The west harbour obviously isn't it!

Fred is so anxious to have a project to provide the money for some downtown renewal that he can't see that no one wants to put a sports team into a white elephant! Surprise, surprise, Bob doesn't want to be locked in to somewhere where he can never make a dollar!

I know that I can't imagine anyone enjoying a trip to a west harbour site. The roads suck, the parking sucks and your car won't be safe anyway! The idea of public transit is a laugh! In Hamilton the buses never go where you need them to go. They handle the city core adequately, the mountain poorly and most of the suburbs not at all. Fred and his boys are promising to spruce up the bus service but why would anyone believe them?

It will likely all become moot anyway. I can't believe that with no legacy anchor tenant Hamilton will still get the Pan-Am games. What will we do with the stadium afterwards? T-Ball championships?

Obviously, no one will want to buy the Cats to keep them in Hamilton if they are still in a money losing location. Bob will have to relocate the team. Meanwhile, it will be very interesting to see the results of the next municipal election. Politicians often forget that the mainstream really doesn't find them that interesting! Given a choice between having a football team or having a particular individual as mayor or your councilor is a no-brainer. They'd take the team! Not every one is a Cat supporter but there are more than enough of them to swing the vote in any particular ward.

This is just so typical of Hamilton! They keep losing business and chasing any new business away. Eventually we will be left with a few halfway houses and some government-funded medical research centres to try to form our entire economy!

It makes "Atlas Shrugged" look like a blueprint!

Edited August 13, 2010 by Wild Bill

[Mr.Canada]

I don't understand why people are against the Tea Party at all or why we don't need one in Canada.

Here are the ten main points in the Tea Party Agenda...

1. Identify constitutionality of every new law: Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does. (82.03%)

2. Reject emissions trading: Stop the "cap and trade" administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants. (72.20%)

3. Demand a balanced federal budget: Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax modification. (69.69%)

4. Simplify the tax system: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words – the length of the original Constitution. (64.9%)

5. Audit federal government agencies for constitutionality: Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in an audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities. (63.37%)

6. Limit annual growth in federal spending: Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth. (56.57%)

7. Repeal the health care legislation passed on March 23, 2010: Defund, repeal and replace the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (56.39%)

8. Pass an 'All-of-the-Above' Energy Policy: Authorize the exploration of additional energy reserves to reduce American dependence on foreign energy sources and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation. (55.5%)

9. Reduce Earmarks: Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark. (55.47%)

10. Reduce Taxes: Permanently repeal all recent tax increases, and extend permanently the George W. Bush temporary reductions in income tax, capital gains tax and estate taxes, currently scheduled to end in 2011. (53.38%)

Source

So you are all against these things? Some of them sound pretty reasonable to me. Reduce taxes, ensure balanced budgets, limit annual government spending? Which of these are you people against? In essence you're in favor of out of control spending, higher taxes and huge deficits then.

So please specifically what are you against in the Tea Party Agenda listed here.

[PIK]

Nobody can govern this country by staying right left or centre, you have to move back and forth on certain issues.

[eyeball]

So how does one square the claim that the center, which is apparently now the majority of Canadians and is owned by the Conservatives, that believes "governments should play a minor role or no role in the regulation of individual behaviour and morality", with the Conservatives crystal clear intent to incarcerate as many people as they can for their behaviour and morality?

I'm afraid of jumping into the middle because it looks like I'll sink like a stone in all the mush.

Yes it is kinda lonely out on the fringe but I think I'll stay put thanks all the same.

[capricorn]

So how does one square the claim that the center, which is apparently now the majority of Canadians and is owned by the Conservatives,

I don't see it quite that way, eyeball. Yes, the Conservatives are moving toward the middle of the spectrum but that transformation is not yet complete. What the Conservatives are doing is following the majority of Canadians who are clustering into the centre. That's pretty well what the Liberals did when the population veered left from the centre position in the early 70s.

[eyeball]

I don't see it quite that way, eyeball. Yes, the Conservatives are moving toward the middle of the spectrum but that transformation is not yet complete. What the Conservatives are doing is following the majority of Canadians who are clustering into the centre. That's pretty well what the Liberals did when the population veered left from the centre position in the early 70s.

So you're telling me that the Conservatives are capable of restricting themselves to what the majority of Canadians want, that governments should be playing a minor role or no role at all in the regulation of individual behaviour and morality?

Heck, I'd probably even vote for them if they could do that.

[capricorn]

So you're telling me that the Conservatives are capable of restricting themselves to what the majority of Canadians want, that governments should be playing a minor role or no role at all in the regulation of individual behaviour and morality?

If they want to remain in government, yes.

[eyeball]

I just can't see the band of fundamentalist wing-nuts that have captured the Conservatives ever standing for that. They'll bolt at the first hint of any principled consistent position on individual rights and keeping the state the hell away from them and off people's backs.

[Evening Star]

The average auto worker isn't an anti-semite

(One can support a Palestinian state without being an anti-Semite.)

[Evening Star]

(One can support a Palestinian state without being an anti-Semite.)

Not that union workers necessarily do en masse, mind you. I think I agree with your general point about the NDP (although the NDP does own the two Windsor ridings). I just disagreed with the equation of pro-Palestinian policies with anti-Semitism,

[Wild Bill]

(One can support a Palestinian state without being an anti-Semite.)

Perhaps. Still, one cannot support the rulers of Iran and NOT be irrationally anti-Jewish!

[Wild Bill]

I don't see it quite that way, eyeball. Yes, the Conservatives are moving toward the middle of the spectrum but that transformation is not yet complete. What the Conservatives are doing is following the majority of Canadians who are clustering into the centre. That's pretty well what the Liberals did when the population veered left from the centre position in the early 70s.

Following into the centre? Maybe, but I think they have a muddled picture of that centre! They have bundled the popular feelings of being soft on crime with a "Reefer Madness" attitude towards marijuana. This is NOT a centrist view at all! Polls have consistently shown over the years that the majority of Canadians are relatively soft on marijuana use, except perhaps in Stockwell Day or Vic Toews ridings.

The Tories really should have kept marijuana exempt from their "get tough on crime" approach. It has only diluted their appeal. It's like bundling child sex crimes with Prohibition! They only go together with a very small minority of Canadian voters.

Particularly in Ontario and Quebec, two areas where the CPC desperately want to increase their seat count. Once again, we see a problem stretching back to the Reform days, where some Westerner makes policy decisions while being totally out to lunch with values outside of his own little western 'pond'. The anti-pot component will likely negate any benefit of the tougher sentencing aspects and likely will COST them a couple more seats than they gain here in the East!

Why oh why do they constantly keep doing this? Talk about your death wish! If Harper wants his majority he better 'get real' very soon. He's running out of time!

[Evening Star]

Perhaps. Still, one cannot support the rulers of Iran and NOT be irrationally anti-Jewish!

How has the NDP supported the rulers of Iran?: http://www.ndp.ca/press/statement-on-situation-in-iran

[Wild Bill]

How has the NDP supported the rulers of Iran?: http://www.ndp.ca/press/statement-on-situation-in-iran

Two words: Libby Davies!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libby_Davies

"On June 5th, 2010, Davies gave an interview in which she suggested that Israel has been occupied territory since 1948. She was criticized for her comments the next day in an Ottawa Citizen editorial. She responded to these criticisms in a letter to the Citizen which can be viewed on Davies' website. On June 15th Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Liberal Foreign Affairs critic Bob Rae echoed the criticisms in the Citizen and demanded her resignation. NDP Leader Jack Layton defended his deputy leader, but described Davies' statement as a "serious mistake" and called the Israeli ambassador to clarify the NDP's policy. "

[Evening Star]

But even those comments aren't a defence of the current rulers of Iran. Nor are they proof of anti-Semitism: They are opinions on the policies and behaviours of specific governments, not attacks on Jewish people as a whole (including the Jewish-Canadian population). In any case, they do not reflect the NDP's official policy, as indicated by Layton's subsequent actions.

[kimmy]

Following into the centre? Maybe, but I think they have a muddled picture of that centre! They have bundled the popular feelings of being soft on crime with a "Reefer Madness" attitude towards marijuana. This is NOT a centrist view at all! Polls have consistently shown over the years that the majority of Canadians are relatively soft on marijuana use, except perhaps in Stockwell Day or Vic Toews ridings.

I completely agree regarding Canadians' attitude towards marijuana. I think Canadians' anger regarding law and order issues is primarily fueled by the perception of lax punishment of serious crimes, not a desire to see people punished for trivial matters.

I think a popular law and order policy would go along the lines of "we're not going to waste resources on pot smokers and jaywalkers and stuff like that, but if you kill or rape or brutalize someone, or you con them out of their life savings, or if you steal their car and smash it into a tree, we're going to make you pay bad."

By the way, I doubt there's a place in the country with more pot smokers or more pot producers per capita than Stockwell country.

-k

[Wild Bill]

I completely agree regarding Canadians' attitude towards marijuana. I think Canadians' anger regarding law and order issues is primarily fueled by the perception of lax punishment of serious crimes, not a desire to see people punished for trivial matters.

I think a popular law and order policy would go along the lines of "we're not going to waste resources on pot smokers and jaywalkers and stuff like that, but if you kill or rape or brutalize someone, or you con them out of their life savings, or if you steal their car and smash it into a tree, we're going to make you pay bad."

By the way, I doubt there's a place in the country with more pot smokers or more pot producers per capita than Stockwell country.

-k

Thanks, Kimmy! You put things much more concisely than I did!

There are always rumours that CPC movers and shakers monitor boards like this one. Geez, I hope so! I'm prone to say how I support them 'cuz they smell less than the other guys but still, that's no reason to do things to make themselves smell even worse!

Importing some of the Ontario Harrisites helped the party perspective a little bit but too often that "minority fundamentalist" viewpoint that irrationally believes it is in the majority leaks into these policy decisions. The CPC just has a bad habit of being out of touch with the mainstream and costing itself gains. That's likely one of the strong reasons why they have such a hard time gaining in the polls over such an inept Opposition. They are an inept GOVERNING party! They are sufficiently competent in administrative matters like trade, foreign affairs, the military and such but when it comes to social issues it's like watching Ned Flanders try to run a chapter of the Hell's Angels. The poor guy is just bewildered!

It's like at the Toronto SARS benefit concert a few years ago. It opened with AC/DC and the Rolling Stones. Pretty well all the acts were traditional rock and roll. However, Justin Timberlake came out and the crowd threw water bottles at him! I felt a bit sorry for him since he had been good enough to donate his time and talents but I couldn't help wondering who had been stupid enough to put him into a playlist of artists where he just didn't fit! The man's career was in pop music, the last thing traditional rock and rollers would respect.

Later on Celine Dion appeared on the Jumbotron screen via a satellite feed. The crowed loudly booed her! The boos were quickly cut out of the external TV feeds but anyone who was there knew what happened. Again, she was totally the wrong fit for that crowd.

It seems to me that whoever had been responsible for those two poor choices is now likely working for Harper, still blissfully unaware of just how out of touch they are! No doubt he or she thinks they are really "hip" and "with it", as they download those Walter Ostenek polka tunes onto their Ipods...

Edited August 15, 2010 by Wild Bill

[capricorn]

Following into the centre? Maybe, but I think they have a muddled picture of that centre!

Perhaps my thoughts were unclear. I tend to agree with the opinion of those political observers who have written that Canadian society is moving to a more centrist position. My interpretation of this view is that it is true with regard to issues but this collective movement does not necessarily mean automatic gravitation toward the Conservatives. To put in context how I read the current Canadian electorate, disgruntled Liberal supporters would most likely move to the Conservatives and dissatisfied Conservatives would move to the Liberals. I do get the sense that the Conservatives are trying to be more moderate to appeal to the middle. Likewise, the Liberals know where the votes are; the Liberals have to challenge the Conservatives on that turf.

The Tories really should have kept marijuana exempt from their "get tough on crime" approach. It has only diluted their appeal. It's like bundling child sex crimes with Prohibition! They only go together with a very small minority of Canadian voters.

I agree. Either the Conservatives really don't know where Canadians stand on the marijuana issue or they don't care. In either case, there is no possible excuse for not addressing the issue in accordance with the wishes of the population.

Why oh why do they constantly keep doing this? Talk about your death wish! If Harper wants his majority he better 'get real' very soon. He's running out of time!

Well the Liberals are clued in and if they hit the right buttons, they could win a minority government.

[eyeball]

I appreciate the heart-felt intelligent reactions to the often overlooked albeit glaring dichotomy I pointed out, it obviously struck a nerve. Maybe banging your head repeatedly against a concrete wall does work once in awhile.

Thank you again.

[Wild Bill]

I appreciate the heart-felt intelligent reactions to the often overlooked albeit glaring dichotomy I pointed out, it obviously struck a nerve. Maybe banging your head repeatedly against a concrete wall does work once in awhile.

Thank you again.

Hey Mr. Eyeball, you shouldn't be that surprised! Some of us agree with you on a number of things. The pertinent point however, is that there are SPECIFIC things!

With Harper, we might disagree with you on this but disagree on something else. The reason we don't often agree with you is that quite frankly, you appear to have decided that you disagree with Harper and the CPC on EVERYTHING! Harper could discover a cure for cancer and I swear you'd start ranting that he's taking jobs away from doctors!

[Remiel]

My main problem with the new laws is that the definition of " organized crime " they use is sure as hell not the definition most of us use when we think of " organized crime " . A group of three people may be criminals that are organized, but they sure as hell are not a real criminal organization. The rules should refer to the type of organization, not the number of people in it.