Scotty Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 (edited) I'm open to debate but honestly if I'm only dealing with staunch fédéralists or conservatives please don't waste your time. There's that broad-minded NDP type attitude we all know and love so much... I'm open to debate - as long as you pretty much agree with me! Edited August 3, 2011 by Scotty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Or between a party leader and an interim party leader? So you're saying it's fine for a Minister to have belonged to the Bloq but not an interim party leader? You do know she agreed not to run for the actual leadership when she became became interim leader, don't you? Not much of a concession given she barely speaks English. I can't see her campaigning in the West with any success. Plus she'll be over seventy next election. It's not unimportant that she joined two separatist parties. Nor would it be if a Tory or Liberal were to rise to a position of authority in those parties. The fact one of your deputy leaders is a wack job doesn't help either, in terms of confidence in NDP leadership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Inexperienced politicans always latch on to something immediately that they percieve will get the easy votes. The first thing the interm leader did was wander off to the west coast to attend some gay pride function...that is more like a municipal approach to politics and not federal - the real important issues should be dealt with - not just what is fashionable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 I wonder why the NPD sycophants can distinguish between a party leader and a non party leader? Must be a cancer of the equivalence ... Yah because party leaders are locked into the party while Cabinet Minsters just leave the party to start new ones. Who were the founders of the Bloc and revived a dead sovereigntist movement? Oh Yeah: Lucien Bouchard- Conservative Minster of the Environment Jean-Charles Lapierre- Liberal Minster of Transportation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 (edited) Not much of a concession given she barely speaks English. I can't see her campaigning in the West with any success. Plus she'll be over seventy next election. It's not unimportant that she joined two separatist parties. Nor would it be if a Tory or Liberal were to rise to a position of authority in those parties. The fact one of your deputy leaders is a wack job doesn't help either, in terms of confidence in NDP leadership. She speaks English quite well and I have talked to her many times. She has given countless speeches in English in her time as head of PSAC although I see how you assume everyone with an strong French Accent doesn't speak English. It seems to be a problem English Canadians have. Edited August 3, 2011 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 No I didn't know that. The NPD's other separatists must be relieved. I hear the Conservatives separatists are for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 No I didn't know that. The NPD's other separatists must be relieved. How would you feel about a cabinet minister who has made an oath that he supports Quebec independence? I guess it depends entirely on what party they belong to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 (edited) How would you feel about a cabinet minister who has made an oath that he supports Quebec independence? I guess it depends entirely on what party they belong to. How about two of them? Yah the Conservatives right now have two of them. PS Dion the former Liberal leader was a PQ supported and knocked on doors for them as well. I guess only Liberals and Conservatives get to have "those types" in their parties right? Let us not forget about the letter Harper wrote to Klien where he talked about how Alberta should take on all Federal responsibilities. He has a past of trying to tear apart the Federal fabric of the nation. Don't worry though he was "just saying" those things he doesn't believe them. The Conservatives are the biggest hypocrites around that is all this shows us. Edited August 3, 2011 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 PS Dion the former Liberal leader was a PQ supported and knocked on doors for them as well. I guess only Liberals and Conservatives get to have "those types" in their parties right? Dion was a real success! Let us not forget about the letter Harper wrote to Klien where he talked about how Alberta should take on all Federal responsibilities. He has a past of trying to tear apart the Federal fabric of the nation. Don't worry though he was "just saying" those things he doesn't believe them. Lets hope he still believes that. I for one do not believe that Canada is the sum total of Ottawa... The Conservatives are the biggest hypocrites around that is all this shows us. What it shows us is the panic mode the NPD are in! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 What it shows us is the panic mode the NPD are in! Really? The fact you can't even acknowledge that there avowed separatists in the Conservative Cabinet makes NDP supporters panicky? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 So far everyone is arguing with each other. No one has considered how this is perceived by mainstream Canadians. In a nutshell, no one in Quebec thinks it's a big deal. Quebecers are very pragmatic in their politics. They can understand perfectly how someone can change their views, either from life experience or just from ambition to get ahead in the game! The separatistes know that much of their support is "soft" and would drop them in a hot buttered instant if a better deal for Quebec presented itself. Belonging to a separatiste party not only carries no shame but also no real identification with a hard core agenda. What Quebecers seem to TOTALLY misunderstand is that to TROC it IS a big deal! Separatistes are viewed as traitors, pure and simple, at worst. At best they are seen as opportunists using the threat of separation to gouge an unfair share of the federal pie from Canadians outside of Quebec. I'm willing to bet that the Quebec newspapers have hardly covered this issue. They might now only as to the reaction in TROC. However, for the NDP it doesn't look like Jack may have thought this all the way through. Or perhaps he has! He knows that his new Quebec support is safe with this lady as a caretaker. His support outside the province is mostly core NDP boosters anyway. They've supported the party for years, no matter what has happened. He's not likely getting much new support at this time in the rest of the county. Time enough to worry about that next election. Still, it would be only sensible for the NDP party brass to acknowledge that outside of Quebec it IS an issue! It would be too easy for this meme to grow and come back to bite them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Lets hope he still believes that. I for one do not believe that Canada is the sum total of Ottawa... You do know that letter was talking about crushing Federalism right? So therefor you yourself are not a Federalist if you believe what Harper wrote about. MDancer: "Pot you are soooo Black" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 I'm willing to bet that the Quebec newspapers have hardly covered this issue. http://recherche.cyberpresse.ca/cyberpresse/search/?q=NPD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 You do know that letter was talking about crushing Federalism right? So therefor you yourself are not a Federalist if you believe what Harper wrote about. MDancer: "Pot you are soooo Black" Not exactly ....Federalism is much more than the handouts the left are so enamoured with. I guess that is why the socialists fear smaller government... ....they think Canada is a welfare office Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Not exactly ....Federalism is much more than the handouts the left are so enamoured with. I guess that is why the socialists fear smaller government... ....they think Canada is a welfare office Yes but what Harper was talking about was taken things which are Federal and HAVE TO BE Federal in a Federalist society and moving those to the provinces. He was talking about Health-care, Education, and Transport. If you move those away from the Federal government one province gets more, has better schools, better Health-care and another has less. You no longer have a Federation. Let's face it my friend you are not a Federalist and you are attack this women for the same things you believe. YOU ARE A Hypocrite. Or maybe you are to dumb to understand what a Federalist state is I don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 He was talking about Health-care, Education Health care and education are provincial responsibilities. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/delivery-prestation/ptrole/index-eng.php http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/brochure/whosresp.html Transportation is shared....but there is no pressing reason why it should be Federal.. If you move those away from the Federal government one province gets more, has better schools, better Health-care and another has less. You no longer have a Federation. Given that is already the case, that is a reality, I guess you think Canada does not exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 YOU ARE A Hypocrite. Or maybe you are to dumb to understand what a Federalist state is I don't know. Ah...back to the panic attack mode...so soon? Don't worry, your talking points will come eventually. Here's a hint, Federalism isn't Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Health care and education are provincial responsibilities. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/delivery-prestation/ptrole/index-eng.php http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/brochure/whosresp.html Transportation is shared....but there is no pressing reason why it should be Federal.. Given that is already the case, that is a reality, I guess you think Canada does not exist. Geez, Morris! Have we gone so far down the left path that someone like punked can make such an elementary mistake? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 (edited) Punked has lost his mind a long time ago, I don't know why anyone would be surprised at that post. First of all, anyone who supports the NDP must have a tenous grasp on reality already, but punked has made it abundantly clear that he will say/fabricate anything to defend them. Edited August 3, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizzy Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 This is being blown way out of proportion. The NDP had no presence or power in quebec before the last election. Many left-minded federalists voted BQ, PQ or QS because of their platform on a host of matters other than separation. I've voted BQ more than once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Health care and education are provincial responsibilities. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/delivery-prestation/ptrole/index-eng.php http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/brochure/whosresp.html Transportation is shared....but there is no pressing reason why it should be Federal.. Given that is already the case, that is a reality, I guess you think Canada does not exist. Yes but having the same Education/Health care across the board is a Federal Responsibility. That is the point of a Federation that all citizens have the same opportunities. Which is why you get health care transfers, and Education transfers which is just what Harper was talking about getting rid of in his letter. Face it you are no Federalist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Yes but having the same Education/Health care across the board is a Federal Responsibility. That is the point of a Federation that all citizens have the same opportunities. Which is why you get health care transfers, and Education transfers which is just what Harper was talking about getting rid of in his letter. Face it you are no Federalist. We don't have the same education and health care across the board. You have no idea what you are talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Punked has lost his mind a long time ago, I don't know why anyone would be surprised at that post. First of all, anyone who supports the NDP must have a tenous grasp on reality already, but punked has made it abundantly clear that he will say/fabricate anything to defend them. Please tell me what a the Federation of Canada is then if it is not it is not an Union of Regions brought together under one government who has promised to provide equally amongst those regions? That is why we have Transfer payments, and Equalization payments, because we are a Federation and every time one of you Conservative posters speaks of getting rid of those you are weakening the Federation that is Canada. Face it, you guys are no Federalists. At least in the sense we see Canada as a Constitutional Federation you would rather we be more of a Republic which is fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 (edited) We don't have the same education and health care across the board. You have no idea what you are talking about. We have the same standards of Health care and Education across the board. In fact if you don't meet the criteria set out by the Federal government for Health or Education then you can not get Transfer payments for them. Yes that criteria is pretty loose but that is what our federal government decided upon. They could tighten it up if they wanted in the Health act. That is what being a part of a Federation is. Seems like Conservative posters here do not actually like Federalism though the way they talk of Transfers. Yet they love to yell at people for also not being strong Federalists. This is why the whole Bloc thing was so popular in Quebec in the first place. They didn't like the idea of the Federal government having so much power. That does not mean all Bloc members want to separate many of them just want Quebec as a province to be able to make decision for themselves on many issues. THIS IS THE SAME THING CONSERVATIVE POSTERS HERE PREACH ALL THE TIME. I hear you guys always talk about cutting transfers, or equalization because you want your province to be able to decide what to do with its money. That is what most Bloc members have been saying for a long time. The hypocrisy is dumbfounding. Edited August 3, 2011 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted August 3, 2011 Report Share Posted August 3, 2011 Yes but having the same Education/Health care across the board is a Federal Responsibility. That is the point of a Federation that all citizens have the same opportunities. Which is why you get health care transfers, and Education transfers which is just what Harper was talking about getting rid of in his letter. Face it you are no Federalist. Could you cite just where in our Constitution or Charter or anywhere it actually says that? I think you must be too young to remember that there was a time when the Feds did NOT meddle in education and health at all! Starting slowly in Pearson's time and gaining traction during the Trudeau years the Liberals started touting this idea of a federal mandate to ensure equal opportunities in all provinces. They actually had no mandate for this idea. They just pulled it out of their butts! However, as a political tool it was brilliant! What really happened is that within a surprisingly short time Ottawa was giving provinces so much money in the name of education and health that they were dependent on it! At that point the Feds effectively had control. No constitutional changes were necessary. Controlling the money was enough. Once everyone started to believe that the Feds were responsible in these areas they could start taking credit for anything that appeared to be positive that happened, even though often the particular province had done all the work! This was also why the Martin cuts in the early 90's hurt the provinces so much. They had grown so used to Ottawa money that when it was cut back they faced big deficits in their health and education budgets. Ironically, the moves backfired on Martin. He cut back the money to the provinces so deeply that some provinces started to question why they should be bound by this idea of equal levels of service in every province. It was always hard even with the handouts for poorer provinces to try to keep up with Ontario and Quebec. Some actually publicly mused about whether it would be cheaper and more efficient to say screw the federal money and go it alone. If they were paying it all themselves then there would be no collar around their necks to heed the federal government (Liberal Party). Punked, I know schools today are very poor on Canadian history, particularly our politics, but surely if you want to argue in political circles you might want to study up a bit on your own? Citizens with a memory are our best defense against politicians. 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.