Denis Lebel

[cybercoma]

What evidence is there they are "back on board" with ferderalism? Aside from supporting a left wing party seen as soft of separatism?

Given the option of voting for a federalist party or a party that explicitly promotes separatism, they picked the federalist party. That's the evidence, regardless of your ridiculous notion that the NDP is "soft" on separatism.

[cybercoma]

I think they should be required to take an oath of Loyalty to the Queen.

In French of course...

You're obviously not aware of this, but they do just that when they become MPs. Even the Bloc MPs had to swear their loyalty to the Queen.

[M.Dancer]

You're obviously not aware of this, but they do just that when they become MPs. Even the Bloc MPs had to swear their loyalty to the Queen.

I am aware. I was thinking more of live, in front of cameras, on Radio-Canada...before an election

Edited August 10, 2011 by M.Dancer

[punked]

Given the option of voting for a federalist party or a party that explicitly promotes separatism, they picked the federalist party. That's the evidence, regardless of your ridiculous notion that the NDP is "soft" on separatism.

NDP a more Federalist party then the CPC who throw the idea of Federalism and central government out the window all the time. They look to decentralize powers which their supports believe in however they are to ignorant to understand what federalism really is. However they also know that if "Quebec wants something" they must be wrong because that is "how it always has been". It is the dumbest logic I have ever seen proving to me Conservatives really don't understand Federalism in anyway.

[cybercoma]

What's even more baffling is that the CPC comes out of Manning's Reform Party, which ran on the catch-phrase, "The West wants in!" Yet, as soon as the Quebec shows that it wants back into federal politics by supporting a federalist party, they slander the NDP as separatists. By their own logic, the CPC is nothing more than Western separatists. Neither is the case of course.

[M.Dancer]

NDP a more Federalist party then the CPC who throw the idea of Federalism ...

still confusing being Canadian federalist with federalism....remember, we are a confederation, not a federation. Less central government is the key to confederation...as they planned it.

[M.Dancer]

.... the CPC comes out of Manning's Reform Party, which ran on the catch-phrase, "The West wants in!"..... the CPC is nothing more than Western separatists.

logic bomb

[cybercoma]

logic bomb

Only to someone that doesn't understand why Preston Manning did that. The West most certainly did not want in. The West wanted out because they felt they were ignored by Ottawa among many other reasons. Manning single-handedly changed that sentiment, focusing the separatists on a plan to take over Ottawa, to force Ottawa into recognizing the West. "The West wants in" was Manning's way of stemming the tide of Western sovereigntists. Their man is at the helm of the government now, but it remains to be seen what will happen should that all come to an end. Nonetheless, when the separatists in Quebec declare that they want in, the CPC accuses them of some secret plot to tear the country apart. Well, the same could apply for the Western separatists that suddenly decided that they wanted in. Edited August 10, 2011 by cybercoma

[M.Dancer]

Only to someone that doesn't understand why Preston Manning did that. The West most certainly did not want in. The West wanted out because they felt they were ignored by Ottawa among many other reasons. Manning single-handedly changed that sentiment, focusing the separatists on a plan to take over Ottawa, to force Ottawa into recognizing the West. "The West wants in" was Manning's way of stemming the tide of Western sovereigntists. Their man is at the helm of the government now, but it remains to be seen what will happen should that all come to an end. Nonetheless, when the separatists in Quebec declare that they want in, the CPC accuses them of some secret plot to tear the country apart. Well, the same could apply for the Western separatists that suddenly decided that they wanted in.

What a load of tripe...

To even suggest that there was a western sovereigntist movement that had any traction at all is political revisionism.

....so far the separatists have not declared "they want in" not now when Quebec voted for the soft on separatism party, and not when Quebec voted for PCs or even the Liberals.

[cybercoma]

Yeah. Ok.

[Oleg Bach]

They should all be asked to make oaths of loyalty to the Queen and be done with it

Especially that little buck tooth girl (sorry mods could not help myself) who is the interm leader for the NDP - she would probably choke and vomit and faint while making an oath to the Queen ...I made one back in the 60s and it served me well - The Queen is mine..if it were not for the throne - my family would not exist.

[M.Dancer]

Yeah. Ok.

Right. When Quebec defeated the 1980 referendum they sent 74 liberals to Ottawa

When Quebec narrowly defeated the 1995 referendum, they sent 31 Federalists to Ottawa..

There has never been a provincial sovereigntist party elected in the west..no referendums...nada

[punked]

still confusing being Canadian federalist with federalism....remember, we are a confederation, not a federation. Less central government is the key to confederation...as they planned it.

We are a Confederation. However no one is fighting for Confederatism, the fight has always to have the Federal government retain the central powers over things like Medicare, Education and so on. That is one of the reasons why Quebec refused to sign the Canada Act. Remember? That is what started the beefed up Separatism in the first place. If anyone is soft on Federalism it is the Conservatives. They are against separation but to pretend they are a Federalist party is stupid and shows how ignorant the Conservative posters are about what the whole fight for the last 50 years has been about. They don't understand what they are even fighting for, why they are fighting for it, or what it is, all they know is that they hate French Canada.

[punked]

What a load of tripe...

To even suggest that there was a western sovereigntist movement that had any traction at all is political revisionism.

....so far the separatists have not declared "they want in" not now when Quebec voted for the soft on separatism party, and not when Quebec voted for PCs or even the Liberals.

Hey Remember that Harper article in the national post I think in 2000? What was it called again? Oh yeah "Separation Alberta style". Talking about ignorant Conservatives here is one right now.

[Oleg Bach]

Just hope when some of you are elected to office you will drop this partisanism - It reminds me of high school -......It would be better if we all stood in the middle and cherry picked what ever was useful to the nation - from the left and from the right.

[M.Dancer]

We are a Confederation. However no one is fighting for Confederatism, the fight has always to have the Federal government retain the central powers over things like Medicare, Education and so on.

The federal government since the days of the BNA, do not have powers over Medicare, education and so on...being the sole jurisdiction of the provinces.

They do however have exclusive controls over canals and the telegraph.

Sounds like you would be more comfortable in a federation

[punked]

The federal government since the days of the BNA, do not have powers over Medicare, education and so on...being the sole jurisdiction of the provinces.

They do however have exclusive controls over canals and the telegraph.

Sounds like you would be more comfortable in a federation

Again and I hate to break this to you, someday I know you will read the Constitution of Canada some day, the Federal government is BY LAW obligated to make sure all social services (Health care, Education, Housing etc.) are at the same or comparable levels across Canada. They must also make sure that taxes are at a comparable level across Canada. It is ok I understand you are ignorant to Federalism in Canada, you have never read the Canada act, and you are truly ignorant to the government of the country you live in. You are a Conservative after all right?

That very section of the Constitution is what Bloc and Conservative members of government have been fighting against together for many many years. Heck Harper wrote a while article about it. It was called "Separation Alberta style". Welcome to the fight for and against Federalism.

Edited August 10, 2011 by punked

[M.Dancer]

Again and I hate to break this to you, someday I know you will read the Constitution of Canada some day, the Federal government is BY LAW obligated to make sure all social services (Health care, Education, Housing etc.) are at the same or comparable levels across Canada.

Wow....that's amazing...so when the liberals slashed funding...they were really ....making things even?

Thabnks Punk, your views are so.....unique.

Get back to me when they are also, correct.

[punked]

Wow....that's amazing...so when the liberals slashed funding...they were really ....making things even?

Thabnks Punk, your views are so.....unique.

Get back to me when they are also, correct.

So you agree or disagree that there is a section of the Constitution that says it is the Federal governments job to make sure there is a comparable level of social services across the country and that the Bloc and Conservatives have always been against this arguably "Most Federalist" portion of the constitution. I see you dismissed my argument with out addressing it at all. So agree or disagree and why? You are also allowed to say you are ignorant of the Federalist laws which govern this country of course.

[Oleg Bach]

That's a question the weasels will never answer.

Of course the leader has more punch - interm or not. If the interm leader had no power - why bother having her step up? Oh...maybe she's just one of those figure head things?

[punked]

Of course the leader has more punch - interm or not. If the interm leader had no power - why bother having her step up? Oh...maybe she's just one of those figure head things?

You think the leader of a party not in power in a majority government has more power then a Minster in that government. I really think we need more civics classes in school because the posters around here are making me lose my faith that Canadians know how our government works.

[PIK]

Lebal was unfront, turmel was not.

[M.Dancer]

So you agree or disagree that there is a section of the Constitution that says it is the Federal governments job to make sure there is a comparable level of social services across the country and that the Bloc and Conservatives have always been against this arguably "Most Federalist" portion of the constitution. I see you dismissed my argument with out addressing it at all. So agree or disagree and why? You are also allowed to say you are ignorant of the Federalist laws which govern this country of course.

The canada health act deals only with funding, not delivery of services or the types of services offered. There is for instance little comparison between maintoba and quebec in the area of child birthing.

I know you would wish that ottawa had greater federal powers, but we live in a confederation, not a socialist federation.

[punked]

The canada health act deals only with funding, not delivery of services or the types of services offered. There is for instance little comparison between maintoba and quebec in the area of child birthing.

I know you would wish that ottawa had greater federal powers, but we live in a confederation, not a socialist federation.

Again would you agree or disagree that the Canadian Constitution the Canada Act has a section that says the Federal government must make sure that social services (Health, Education, Housing, etc.) must be comparable across the country and that non-Federalist parties (Cons and Bloc) have taken issue with this section time and time again. Going so far as having the Anti-Federalist leader Harper write an article detailing how Alberta should break this law in the article "Separatism Alberta style"? Simple question. I am just pointing out that while the NDP and Liberals are federalist parties the Bloc and Cons are not. I am not saying the Conservatives are a Separatist party they just have never fought for Federalism. You want your cake and to eat it to.

[M.Dancer]

Again would you agree or disagree that the Canadian Constitution the Canada Act has a section that says the Federal government must make sure that social services (Health, Education, Housing, etc.) must be comparable across the country and that non-Federalist parties (Cons and Bloc) have taken issue with this section time and time again. Going so far as having the Anti-Federalist leader Harper write an article detailing how Alberta should break this law in the article "Separatism Alberta style"? Simple question. I am just pointing out that while the NDP and Liberals are federalist parties the Bloc and Cons are not. I am not saying the Conservatives are a Separatist party they just have never fought for Federalism. You want your cake and to eat it to.

Yes I disagree that the Canada act is part of the constitution and that its function is to make things comparable.

Because they aren't. Try having a major heart attack in iqaluit...and another in Toronto. Try getting a midwife in Red Deer...and in Montreal...

bah...socialists and their utopian bullpoop...