jordan Posted June 11, 2004 Report Posted June 11, 2004 There is far more here at stake than you Understand or even can Imagine-The United Nations and World Opinion of Canada could be at stake!!!--They look at a Country and how their Social Programs look after the low Income and poor people--And Canada needs to do more not less-on these Issues--Harper is only Pro Middle class and up to the Rich-according to American think tanks assessment of his Platform--He will push us backwards not forwards-by Twenty years--The mayors all see that--We can't Afford his Experiment or Games Right Now!!! Quote
maplesyrup Posted June 11, 2004 Report Posted June 11, 2004 Don't worry - have a little faith in Canadians, eh? Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
August1991 Posted June 11, 2004 Report Posted June 11, 2004 The sky is falling!! The sky is falling!! And according to PM PM, Canada will get smaller!! (Is this because of global warming?) I thought these kind of hysterical scare tactics were only used against the PQ. Quote
maplesyrup Posted June 11, 2004 Report Posted June 11, 2004 Don't see how Harper can win because: 1 - Harper would have had us in Iraq, contrary to even what the majority of Americans now believe was the wrong decision. 2 - Harper doesn't believe in abortion rights for women, same-sex marriage, or gay rights, 3 - Harper wants to give tax breaks to the rich 4 - Harper believes in capital punishment 5 - Harper does not support Kyoto Accord 6 - Harper does not believe in bilingualism Harper just seems to be on the wrong side of too many issues that are dear to Canadians' hearts. Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
Alliance Fanatic Posted June 11, 2004 Report Posted June 11, 2004 Harper believes in free votes on all of those issues, and the last time I remember Harper was pro-choice on abortion. MS try getting some actual debate in, instead of just posting a bunch of nonsense left wing dribble. Jordan, if Canadian's want to take care of the poor, then they can with the tax breaks they recieve from the government. I don't think the world really has that high of an opinion of Canada, Canada is not really a player when all things are considered. Thats due to the fact that we cannot look after our military, have a lack immigration system, not to mention our criminal first justice system. Quote "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" - George Orwell's Animal Farm
Sully Posted June 11, 2004 Report Posted June 11, 2004 MS back up your statements with valid documented points, lets hear it, come on!!!! Go through each one of your numbered statements and provide the facts on each please, I would really appreciate it. Quote
Slavik44 Posted June 11, 2004 Report Posted June 11, 2004 1 - Considerign the cons. are looking at a minority government, we must look at it froma minority stand point, and the fact is the NDP, bloc, and liberals would have voted it down. 2 - No he belives in a FREE vote. As in letting MP's decide in what they belive, look at Bush he is anti abortion and more conservative then harper, and he has not gotten rid of abortion. 3 - "I am never against reducing or eliminating any federal tax and we will have in our platform a range of tax reductions with a focus on cutting middleclass personal taxes and lessening taxes for families with children. Those will be our main focus but far from being our exclusive focus." 4 - "When he introduced the Conservative law and order platform on Tuesday, Harper was careful to make the point his government would not propose death penalty legislation." I myself am adamantly agianst Capital punishment and belive harper when he says he wouldn't allow it. 5 - your right he is not in favour of the kyoto accord, but he has said he would support working focusing on pollution control. 6 - Fortunantley Canada is not a billiangual country, and if you are to deaf to notice the fact that atleast 70% of canadians cannot converse in both english and french, I question your ability to make accurate statements on this subject. Quote The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. - Ayn Rand --------- http://www.politicalcompass.org/ Economic Left/Right: 4.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.54 Last taken: May 23, 2007
jordan Posted June 12, 2004 Author Report Posted June 12, 2004 Harper today told his Party's members to keep their mouths shut because too many of their Alliance Right wing Opinions are getting out that are Damaging to the Alliance Conservatives-Eric Chandler said Harper today Issued a Gag Order to All Conservative Candidates----Chandler said that We should Practice what we Preach and be Up front and Honest about our Social Policies,Instead of Hiding-----Paul Martin said today that Harper would definetly attack our Social Programs...... Quote
idealisttotheend Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 The free vote appears to be the new last refuge of the politician. No more, simply stating ambigious positions or avoiding the questiong through conventional means. No now we have the magic phrase, not "before the courts" or "national security" but "free vote". Can anyone imagine if that was said about taxes: Reporter: "Mr. Harper what is your position on corporate tax rates?" Harper: "Well, we'll hold a free vote on that, I believe in letting MPs expressing themselves." Now if you say free votes are okay for abortion but inappropriate for corporate tax rates you have a problem. That suggests the rights of the unborn/women aren't as important as corporate tax rates and you are going to seriously annoy anyone who takes the issue seriously from either side. If you say abortion is a moral issue and therefore appropriate for a free vote then you automatically argue against any law on the subject. After all why let MPs decide, why not just let the citizen's decide for themselves? The contridictions are obvious and the Cons get away with it only because they are campaigning as the party out in front and can try to be as uncontroversial as possible. Quote All too often the prize goes, not to who best plays the game, but to those who make the rules....
August1991 Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 Now if you say free votes are okay for abortion but inappropriate for corporate tax rates you have a problem.Why do I have a problem? I see a difference.Votes of confidence include money bills. Have you ever thought why? In the US Consitution, money bills must start in the House of Representatives, have you ever thought why? Most people would be able to tell you whether they like a car's colour. But few could tell you whether the motor needs an overhaul. Most of us have opinions on moral questions. Few of us have clear opinions on appropriate tax rates. How many know what the oil depreciation rate should be? A different take might be this: why should tax bills require party discipline? now we have the magic phrase, not "before the courts" or "national security" but "free vote". Can anyone imagine if that was said about taxes:Reporter: "Mr. Harper what is your position on corporate tax rates?" Harper: "Well, we'll hold a free vote on that, I believe in letting MPs expressing themselves." Well said!If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, national security is the first basis of a brief. As to free votes, the US is almost what you describe. Maybe MPs are used to being trained seals and candidates are new to the idea that they may actually have to indicate independent thought to earn votes. Quote
caesar Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 Obviously, it is time we made politicians hold more referendum votes to decide issues that Canadioans hold dear. Seems that they will say anything they that the believe people want to hear before elections; then do whatever they please after. Democracy is not just meant to mean our opionions are only taken to decide who makes the decisions for this country. Politicians should respect our wishes at ALL times. I get really tired of Bush bragging that makes the decisions; that he does not make decisions by observing opinion polls. In other words; our opinions are ignored. August; most of us know more than you think. I do not buy a car because I like the colour; what I don't know myself about the engine or other important information; I CAN RESEARCH and get informed. Sorry if you feel that is beyond your reach. Quote
August1991 Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 August; most of us know more than you think. I do not buy a car because I like the colour; what I don't know myself about the engine or other important information; I CAN RESEARCH and get informed. Sorry if you feel that is beyond your reach. You are right caesar. I'm sorry if I implied otherwise. My point was not about the decision to buy or not. I simply meant that on moral questions - gay marraige for example - most people have a ready answer. But for technical questions, as you say, it requires some research. I usually ask my dentist to clean my teeth. I tend to defer to him on more complex questions. But I always want to know what he's doing and why. We elect politicians in somewhat the same way. Harper's suggestion of a free vote to solve the colour question seems reasonable to me. His idea of saying the party together will solve the motor overhaul question strikes me as sensible too, as long as they've explained the basic principles for the choice. Quote
takeanumber Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 Fortunantley Canada is not a billiangual country, and if you are to deaf to notice the fact that atleast 70% of canadians cannot converse in both english and french, What's wrong with being deaf? Quote
Slavik44 Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 Fortunantley Canada is not a billiangual country, and if you are to deaf to notice the fact that atleast 70% of canadians cannot converse in both english and french, What's wrong with being deaf? I cannot belive some people, great way to take my comments out of context. It is interestign you attack my choice of words but not what I said, why is this? Because I am right...go ahead admit it, I am right on this one atleast 70% of canadians only speak one langauge...far from being bilangual. It is the truth face it Canada is not truly billangual. Quote The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. - Ayn Rand --------- http://www.politicalcompass.org/ Economic Left/Right: 4.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.54 Last taken: May 23, 2007
caesar Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 By the way Slavic; We ARE a bilingual country. We don't ALL have to speak both languages to make it so. It is officially recognized whether us westerners like it or not. Harper claims he can do all the spending he plans while cutting taxes for the rich because the government surplus is probably much larger than the government claims. Gee, usually the governing party exaggerates their financial stability. Obviously: Harper thinks the Liberals have managed our tax money extremely well if they have an even larger surplus. However we do still have a deficit; that needs to keep shrinking as it has been under the present government. Yes, Canada will lose world respect if Harper makes the regressive changes to our social and environmental programs. We will be downgraded and lose world respect. We have already been there done that in BC under Gordon Campbell. I believe there have been three notices of our downgraded position from the UN. His party may call themselves Liberals but they are right wing Conservatives. They share many of the same ideas as Harper and co. Quote
Argus Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 There is far more here at stake than you Understand or even can Imagine-The United Nations and World Opinion of Canada could be at stake!!!--What world opinion of Canada? Nobody in the world gives two farts about Canada, what it does, who runs it, or even if it exists. And the vast majority of countries in the United Nations are shitholes run by byrants and despots. You're terrified they'll have a bad opinion of us?And for what? Because Harper might uh, do what exactly? Slash social programs so he gets booted out at the next election? Right. Sure. All political parties devote themselves to getting into power just so they can hack and slash and burn away at everything so that they get decimated the next time around. It's hard to believe the lack of thinking which goes into some of the posts here, especially among the brand new members (many of whom sound exactly alike in their mindless hysteria if you take my meaning). Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 Don't see how Harper can win because:1 - Harper would have had us in Iraq, contrary to even what the majority of Americans now believe was the wrong decision. 2 - Harper doesn't believe in abortion rights for women, same-sex marriage, or gay rights, 3 - Harper wants to give tax breaks to the rich 4 - Harper believes in capital punishment 5 - Harper does not support Kyoto Accord 6 - Harper does not believe in bilingualism Harper just seems to be on the wrong side of too many issues that are dear to Canadians' hearts. Yeah, right, Maple. You forgot a few. Harper sacrifices virgins to Satan!! Harper sucks the marrow from the bones of babies!!! Harper likes to molest little boys!!!!! Harper believe in ah, oooh, iccck capitalism!!!!!!!!! And free votes!!!!?!?!?!?! AhhhhhhH! How can we survive it if MPs get to vote as we want them!?!?!? Oh God please let the NDP get in to protect us and tell us what to do and think and watch and read and make all our decisions and choices for us!!!! Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 Harper today told his Party's members to keep their mouths shut because too many of their Alliance Right wing Opinions are getting out that are Damaging to the Alliance Conservatives-The real problem is that the Corruption Party and its supporters in the media (most of which is owned by supporters of the Corruption Party) have gotten desperate and are trying to scare voters away from the issues by frightening them with non issues. The original story on abortion, with big, scary headlines, came from a Corruption Party supporter on the Globe and Mail, who basically prodded a candidate again and again to get something scary, and failed. But the Globe used what it had. The candidate sort of agreed that councilling would be a good idea for women getting abortions (something Paul Martin, the leader of the Corruption Party had already said). Big, scary headlines screamed out that the Tories would ban abortions. Then the rest of the media started looking for Torie candidates who were pro-life, trying to get statements against abortion (completely ignoring the Corruption Party members who were virulently anti abortion). So now all we're getting is big scary stories about abortion - even though all candidates and all members of the media know damned well there will be no changes to abortion.But you and the other supporters of the Corruption Party don't want us talking about the graft and theft and dishonesty and incompetence and lack of integrity of your candidates and leaders, do you? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 The free vote appears to be the new last refuge of the politician. No more, simply stating ambigious positions or avoiding the questiong through conventional means. No now we have the magic phrase, not "before the courts" or "national security" but "free vote". Can anyone imagine if that was said about taxes:Reporter: "Mr. Harper what is your position on corporate tax rates?" Harper: "Well, we'll hold a free vote on that, I believe in letting MPs expressing themselves." Except that the only things the party doesn't have fairly firm policies on are a few social issues.How about we ask Jack Layton about exaclty how much he's going to increase our taxes by? How much are his grand schemes and social engineering efforts going to cost all of us middle class folks? $1000 a year each? $2000 a year each? More? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 Obviously, it is time we made politicians hold more referendum votes to decide issues that Canadioans hold dear.. Uhm, the Alliance proposed that last election. The NDP and Liberals and the media took the position that this would lead to the complete destruction of Canada and our way of life. If we were allowed to express our opinions instead of letting the media and politicians tell us what to think then God only knows what would happen. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 12, 2004 Report Posted June 12, 2004 Harper claims he can do all the spending he plans while cutting taxes for the rich because the government surplus is probably much larger than the government claims. I'd like to see where Harper has said he would cut taxes for the rich. No doubt you have some kind of cite to support this absurd claim of yours. Or are you one of those people who believe anyone who has a job and can support himself is rich? I understand that the number set by the NDP as to who comprises this "rich" grouping is so low that most Canadians fall within it. I think for a single person with no dependants it's something like $41,000. If you make more than that you're "rich" and subject to having the NDP take as much money away as they can find. And if you express any doubt about that then you're simply being greedy. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
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.