Wild Bill Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 That was 10 years ago get over it, or don't vote liberal. Not voting conservative doesn't equate voting liberal. If you can't vote for someone don't vote or run. It only costs $4000 to run as an MP. If we complained about corruptions happening a decade or more ago we would still be talking about how the conservatives gave a sole source contract to their own stock owned railline with public tax dollars effectively embezzling public funds to private pockets. When was the last time you heard about the rail line contraversy? When was the last time YOUR personal party won a seat? I'm too old to waste my time trying to start a party based around my own personal views. Also, I lack the arrogance! I'd like to see some real change NOW! That means I must work with the major two parties as they are today. I spent the better part of a decade supporting Reform. I did my share! Nobody lives forever and we don't continue to have the energy of the young. That being said, thank God we lose the naivete and the arrogance! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Such rulings cannot be automatically appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada; the party must seek leave to appeal, which they will do. I agree Chretien had to know (about adscam), I've always felt that he was in on it. Is EC going after those Liberal and NDP MPs who did the same thing which was mentioned in the original committee meeting, and what about the Liberal leadership loans - it sure appears that this has become political with EC. Also don't forget that this is about spending too much of their own money, while the greater Liberal scandals such as the one involving Cretien was about stealing and spending our money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinko Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Such rulings cannot be automatically appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada; the party must seek leave to appeal, which they will do. I agree Chretien had to know (about adscam), I've always felt that he was in on it. Is EC going after those Liberal and NDP MPs who did the same thing which was mentioned in the original committee meeting, and what about the Liberal leadership loans - it sure appears that this has become political with EC. Also don't forget that this is about spending too much of their own money, while the greater Liberal scandals such as the one involving Cretien was about stealing and spending our money. Even if leave is granted a unanimous decision at the lower appeal court will have some influence at the Supreme Court level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 After reading through this thread and other threads on this subject I've come to realize that people seem to think this is about the Conservative Party's MONEY and how they spent it to "get the most bang for the buck" and that's all... Here's a NEWS FLASH for you; IT'S NOT! It's about YOUR MONEY, YOUR TAX MONEY, being spent by people in a specific Political Party for that Party's gain, people in a Political Party using YOUR MONEY whether you "support" that Party or not... FYI - ANY candidate that runs in an election and receives 10% or more of the popular VOTE in that riding gets REIMBURSED the money he/she spent on his/her election up to the maximum allowed SPENDING LIMIT from federal election funds which is funded by YOUR TAX DOLLARS... In short this is about DEFRAUDING YOU and ME not some arbitrary entity called a Political Party, and NO, not "all parties" do it because it is illegal to do so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 After reading through this thread and other threads on this subject I've come to realize that people seem to think this is about the Conservative Party's MONEY and how they spent it to "get the most bang for the buck" and that's all... Here's a NEWS FLASH for you; IT'S NOT! It's about YOUR MONEY, YOUR TAX MONEY, being spent by people in a specific Political Party for that Party's gain, people in a Political Party using YOUR MONEY whether you "support" that Party or not... FYI - ANY candidate that runs in an election and receives 10% or more of the popular VOTE in that riding gets REIMBURSED the money he/she spent on his/her election up to the maximum allowed SPENDING LIMIT from federal election funds which is funded by YOUR TAX DOLLARS... In short this is about DEFRAUDING YOU and ME not some arbitrary entity called a Political Party, and NO, not "all parties" do it because it is illegal to do so... Just as I keep saying - BOTH parties stink! Still, when all's said and done, Tory money comes in small amounts, from ordinary Canadians. Liberal money comes in big lumps, from "suits"! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 This decision needs to go to the Supreme Court of Canada. IMO the integrity and fairness of the electoral system is maintained by ensuring that the most popular party wins, not by "leveling the playing field" so that less popular parties are given a leg up. It also seems to have implications for the CPC moving to do away with the cash welfare the parties receive quarterly as that does not result in a 'level playing field' does it, some get way more than others. This is a philosophical statement, not a legal one. The Supreme Court is not going to consider that at all, what it is going to consider is the words of the legislation, and to some extent the intent of Parliament, and EC's use of its powers in this case. There's no point at pathetic t-shirt sloganeering over this. This is going to be about legal arguments, not about how you feel about election funding. In fact, you're feelings on the matter, without some legal weight, are utterly and completely irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Just as I keep saying - BOTH parties stink! Still, when all's said and done, Tory money comes in small amounts, from ordinary Canadians. Liberal money comes in big lumps, from "suits"! Nope, it's about stealing my, and your, MONEY for personal gain by a party I DON'T support... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Nope, it's about stealing my, and your, MONEY for personal gain by a party I DON'T support... You do understand that you did not respond at all to the points made by wild bill right? The quality of posts on this forum are going way down hill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/appeals-court-shreds-tory-defence-in-campaign-finance-case/article1925509/ So it seems elections Canada is now the victor in the campaign financing case that the Conservatives previously claimed to exhonerate them. This as the new charges of illegality have come through on 4 individuals (2 sentators) and the party. What 67 candidates could be found ineligible to run again? Anyone have the list? So who was sentenced to what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 You do understand that you did not respond at all to the points made by wild bill right? The quality of posts on this forum are going way down hill. I wasn't aware that I was responding to anyone in particular by stating some FACTS about how elections work and who actually puts up the money for them... "The foundation stones for a balanced success are honesty, character, integrity, faith, love and loyalty." - Zig Ziglar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 ALL political parties stink. There simply is not a party out there that suits me, oh well. I will support the candidate with the most to offer me. That is true for most citizens. If you want the public to become more involved then raise the stakes ad offer more than the other guy. More nowadays means more representation as in free votes. Free votes can and will do far more for citizens than anything else at this point because it will return elected public servants back in line by making them accountable for their actions. The people deserve their representatives, this is a democracy and the citizens can push to get their way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 I wasn't aware that I was responding to anyone in particular by stating some FACTS about how elections work and who actually puts up the money for them... "The foundation stones for a balanced success are honesty, character, integrity, faith, love and loyalty." - Zig Ziglar You quoted Wild Bill why bother quoting a post if you are not responding to it. I doubt you have ever worked an election campaign in your life, or understand how the system works. I find your posts very naive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 ALL political parties stink. There simply is not a party out there that suits me, oh well. I will support the candidate with the most to offer me. That is true for most citizens. If you want the public to become more involved then raise the stakes ad offer more than the other guy. More nowadays means more representation as in free votes. Free votes can and will do far more for citizens than anything else at this point because it will return elected public servants back in line by making them accountable for their actions. The people deserve their representatives, this is a democracy and the citizens can push to get their way. Total agreement Jerry! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Total agreement Jerry! I am all for political alliances and fellowship, I am against the current established order of things with respect to how the game of politics is played. Party leaders are policy Gods, no other opinions are relevant. That kind of thing is counter productive and will never serve to elevate the office of the public servant. Which is what I believe the true cause of the current malaise toward politics in this country. Top down driven policy wonks are not known for delivering benefit to citizens. Grass roots are where things really start and its where things can evolve from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 ALL political parties stink. There simply is not a party out there that suits me, oh well. I will support the candidate with the most to offer me. That is true for most citizens. If you want the public to become more involved then raise the stakes ad offer more than the other guy. More nowadays means more representation as in free votes. Free votes can and will do far more for citizens than anything else at this point because it will return elected public servants back in line by making them accountable for their actions. The people deserve their representatives, this is a democracy and the citizens can push to get their way. I agree, since that's what I've been saying on this for'em all along... While ALL parties may "stink" there's a lot of GOOD PEOPLE running for the right reasons and one can only hope that those are the people that get elected although it ain't necessarily so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 While ALL parties may "stink" there's a lot of GOOD PEOPLE running for the right reasons and one can only hope that those are the people that get elected although it ain't necessarily so... There are always good people running, but the second they get to Ottawa, they're slapped with caucus unity, secrecy, and if they don't like it, discipline, ultimately leading to being thrown out of caucus. The fact is that a good many important issues are not decided in Parliament, but rather in caucus meetings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 There are always good people running, but the second they get to Ottawa, they're slapped with caucus unity, secrecy, and if they don't like it, discipline, ultimately leading to being thrown out of caucus. The fact is that a good many important issues are not decided in Parliament, but rather in caucus meetings. True, but that relates more to our political system and won't change in the forseeable future... Truly good people have the ability to overcome many of the "deficits" of our system which in TRUTH boils down to who the Leader of the Party is... That also determines to a great extent the QUALITY of the people running under that party's banner... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 (edited) Oops, wrong thread... Edited March 2, 2011 by GWiz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 True, but that relates more to our political system and won't change in the forseeable future... Truly good people have the ability to overcome many of the "deficits" of our system which in TRUTH boils down to who the Leader of the Party is... That also determines to a great extent the QUALITY of the people running under that party's banner... Actually MPs have the full power to alter the system if they want. They're under no legal obligation to do what their party leaders say. They are in fact free agents. As we've seen in Britain from time to time, a caucus revolt, or even the threat of a caucus revolt, has a wondrously tempering effect on party leaders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Actually MPs have the full power to alter the system if they want. They're under no legal obligation to do what their party leaders say. They are in fact free agents. As we've seen in Britain from time to time, a caucus revolt, or even the threat of a caucus revolt, has a wondrously tempering effect on party leaders. Also true... "Where there's a will there's a way, where there's no will there's no way." "You cannot escape the responsibility of tomorrow by evading it today." - Abraham Lincoln "We are free up to the point of choice, then the choice controls the chooser." - Mary Crowley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Tories keep bring up the Ad scam and the Adscam was wrong and the Liberal party paid for it in the 2005-6 election. Today, none of the people, who were from Quebec, are seating today and the Liberal party have many new members. On the other hand we have another new party who is being judged by being the party that was going to be accountable, more honest and fix things. Well, that's not how things are turning out and Canadians will judge them on THEIR performance. Having said that, there are die-hard Tory supporters that will vote for the Tories no matter how much cheating, lying, spinning, and undemocratic they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Tories keep bring up the Ad scam and the Adscam was wrong and the Liberal party paid for it in the 2005-6 election. Today, none of the people, who were from Quebec, are seating today and the Liberal party have many new members. On the other hand we have another new party who is being judged by being the party that was going to be accountable, more honest and fix things. Well, that's not how things are turning out and Canadians will judge them on THEIR performance. Having said that, there are die-hard Tory supporters that will vote for the Tories no matter how much cheating, lying, spinning, and undemocratic they are. It's called misdirection. Rather than actually deal with their own troubles, they'll just keep trying to bring back the old carcass of scandals past. It's tiresome, in my view, because I would just like a Tory supporter to admit that maybe some of their fundraisers did bad things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrGreenthumb Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 It's called misdirection. Rather than actually deal with their own troubles, they'll just keep trying to bring back the old carcass of scandals past. It's tiresome, in my view, because I would just like a Tory supporter to admit that maybe some of their fundraisers did bad things. Don't hold your breath....I enjoy reading your posts, wouldn't want you to suffocate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 2, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 (edited) When was the last time YOUR personal party won a seat? I'm too old to waste my time trying to start a party based around my own personal views. Also, I lack the arrogance! I'd like to see some real change NOW! That means I must work with the major two parties as they are today. I spent the better part of a decade supporting Reform. I did my share! Nobody lives forever and we don't continue to have the energy of the young. That being said, thank God we lose the naivete and the arrogance! I was born with my seat representing the mofo earth. Social is special in that it doesn't try to place beliefs on the system, it places the system on peoples beliefs. The PAYFOR plan for instance allows people to create programs themselves and to fund raise for them. Services are administered to through public crown corporations where individuals who take part in those programs such as pension plans are members who "buy shares" in that service company. Or buy shares in other companies. Work programs are of those willing and the program is funded with funds raised only from the program. Excess funds raised through the programs are "bonus funds" Basically it is a special corporation that allows state corporation with special benefits since proceeds build right back into the works program. The government would not debt spend, and run at 0 deficit. Only spending money it earned. The courts would be opened to a new "public prosecutions branch" and police would be given more powers to settle minor offences out of court. Public proseuctions would be elected UNPAID judges. Victim and criminal meanwhile would be able to have out of court mutual agreed settlement for tresury bill offences, while Public Safety offences would be more or less only what is deemed a current indictable "serious public safety offence" (provinces meanwhile would be given back the adminsitration of justice for minor offences. The courts would be opened up to public prosecutors to argue cases rather than crown prosecutors and no legal qualification would be required for any federal court for any civil case including cases against corporations and any provincial court baring leave to hearing due to not being a professional lawyer would be given access to the federal courts due to rights of redress being infringed thus default appeal to the higher court. The bottom line here is that... SOCIAL doesn't say what is done - it only says YOU GUYS DO IT. It gives the POWER TO THE PEOPLE. THE PEOPLE WITH ABILITY TO RESOLVE COURT ISSUES THE PEOPLE WITH THE POWER TO RESOLVE THEIR OWN MONETARY FUNDING ISSUES - WITHOUT INCOME TAXES THE PEOPLE WITH THE POWER TO HAVE SERVICES AND THE RIGHT TO EMPLOYMENT WITHOUT COSTING OTHER PEOPLE MONEY SOCIAL DOESN'T TELL YOU HOW TO BE OR HOW TO DO IT, IT PROVIDES THE STRUCTURE TO DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. SOCIAL IS FREE - SOCIAL IS LIBERTY - SOCIAL (via the advisory council) IS REAL DEMOCRACY! 1 VOTE FOR 1 PERSON - EVERYONE WITH 1 VOTE TO HAVE YOUR SAY... A FORCE THAT PARLIAMENT SHOULD LISTEN TO. SOCIAL IS FREEDOM LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY!!!!! but most of all it is your choice. make the right choice - support the SOCIAL party - support yourself. (there would be a couple exceptions to this such as the mandatory medical charity fund for the medical sector to donate to, and the old age poverty family contribution) Edited March 2, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Actually, the in and out thing is perfectly reasonable to me as I understand that the Liberals used it for years. It only became illegal when Conservatives used it. Consider also that Elections Canada pressed charges before they supposedly knew that the decision was being overturned. hmmmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.