We can't afford Mulcair's NDP

[Guest Derek L]

History tells us that the political right and the poltical left,on the authoritarian side,LOVE the idea of the "police state"...

See NAZI Germany,Fascist Italy,Fascist Spain,Fascist Portugal,Marxist USSR,Marxist China,MarxistNorth Korea,Marxist Cambodia as examples..

Indeed, one doesn't need to look further than the Political Compass

[mentalfloss]

In a post-socio-economic hell-hole -

One man threatens the very fabric of our existence by taking the rest of our money.

MULCAIR 2012

Run now, before he --- oh shi...

Edited June 29, 2012 by mentalfloss

[PIK]

Mulcair has lost the west and when the cons press him on the new ship contracts ,he will have to say he will cancel them, then say goodbye to the east.

[Guest Derek L]

Mulcair has lost the west and when the cons press him on the new ship contracts ,he will have to say he will cancel them, then say goodbye to the east.

Indeed, once the full lifetime costing is released for the National Shipbuilding Strategy, thus making the F-35 look like pocket change, I do wonder how long the NDP (Ironically the two winners on each coasts, have facilities in NDP ridings) will support “Harper’s plan to weaponize the ocean with stealth combat ships”…….

[westguy]

the cons are scared of mulcair and they know they have no chance to defeat the ndp in 2015. the cons are the most scandolous goverment in history. just think how many more scandals there will be before 2015. they wont be able to sweep them all under the rug like the afghan detainee issue that abused the human rights of afghanis

you must have forgotten the Liberals

[westguy]

Nope...

Just give the police sweeping powers to spy on any and all Canadian citizens to stop "child pornographers"...

'Cause using Vic's logic,many Canadian citzens aren't just pedophiles..They like to put it on film,as well!!!

(Hi Vic! )

Vis is a loose cannon

[bleeding heart]

and massive new spending on, let's just call them our less productive citizenry.

They're gonna spend massively on currency speculators and advertisers?

[westguy]

Actually, the gun registry would be resuscitated and melded with the stolen cell phone registry. A twofer, if you will. Police would not only know if a gun was on the premises before entering, but also a stolen cell phone. Clever stuff.

The gun reistry was a boondoggle intended to lead people to believe the Libs were doing something to stop crime. The registry was intended to appease the feminists after the Montreal massacre ( Mark Lepine's gun was registered). Alll it accomplished was to piss away billions of dollars (we're not sure HOW much) and to make farmers and hunters into criminals

[westguy]

My point is that yes... this is a patently absurd idea. However, it's not even remotely close to being as dangerous or worrisome as the ideas that have come from Tory backbenchers.

do you hate everything about the Tories?

[westguy]

The funny thin is that the two most successful premiers in canada today are darrell dexter and greg selinger. i have a good friend in manitoba and he said manitoba is doing the best now than it ever has in all its history. you know what dexter and selinger have in common? that's right....NDP!!!!

the NDP did not create the good times in Manitoba

[Moonlight Graham]

Totally awesome journalist beatdown. My respect for Mulcair just went up a few notches.

[waldo]

Totally awesome journalist beatdown. My respect for Mulcair just went up a few notches.

yes! Seeing Brian Lilley taking the full brunt... FoxNews North's, uhhh... "senior correspondent"... was a bonus!

[punked]

Indeed, once the full lifetime costing is released for the National Shipbuilding Strategy, thus making the F-35 look like pocket change, I do wonder how long the NDP (Ironically the two winners on each coasts, have facilities in NDP ridings) will support “Harper’s plan to weaponize the ocean with stealth combat ships”…….

Everyone does know a National shipbuilding Strategy has been a part of the NDP plateform for about 20 years now right? It has been supported time after time by NDP members. Why would Mulcair kill an idea which is the NDPs? Oh Yeah because people on this forum have no clue what the NDP stands for or the ideas Harper lifted from them.

[cybercoma]

do you hate everything about the Tories?

No. I liked some of their populist ideas when they were called Reform. Now that Harper is a sell-out and has dropped his election-bait populism to be the mouthpiece for the oil sands, there aren't very many redeeming qualities left.

[cybercoma]

the NDP did not create the good times in Manitoba

They had a hell of a lot more to do with the good times in Manitoba than the CPC had to do with Canada's resistance to the "current" economic crisis.

[August1991]

That's the taxpayers that Mulcair would be taking money off of. I would expect any NDP government institute across the board tax increases on virtually everything. Income taxes would go up. Gas taxes would go up. Sales taxes would go up. And there'd a new regimen of environmental taxes on industry.

And the deficit would also go up, btw. I expect massive new spending in the form of tax credits and government incentives for environmental initiatives, and massive new spending.

Forget taxes, it is government spending that matters.

This Conservative federal government has been profligate. It has spent billions on summits, defence airplanes, more federal civil servants and even the PM's security. It has said yes to every crazy scheme supposedly as part of its "incremental conservatism" strategy, or maybe because the politicians simply didn't know better. (Bev Oda simply wanted to smoke in her hotel suite, and a right side limo arrival.)

----

As much as I find the NDP caucus a group of vegetarian whackos, they would probably spend less than Harper's crew - and they may even spend our money for stuff that many of us want.

[bleeding heart]

Not to mention the NDP's platform proposes ZERO tax on small businesses.

We have a poster here who would actually tell you this is a kind of Stealth Communism.....

I kid you not.

[cybercoma]

As much as I find the NDP caucus a group of vegetarian whackos, they would probably spend less than Harper's crew - and they may even spend our money for stuff that many of us want.

I know I've been hopped up on medication lately, but did I just step into Bizarro World?

[bleeding heart]

I know I've been hopped up on medication lately, but did I just step into Bizarro World?

That one caught me off-guard as well.

[TimG]

As much as I find the NDP caucus a group of vegetarian whackos, they would probably spend less than Harper's crew

ROTFLMAO. Sorry. Don't believe it. The NDP are too wedded to their big government/big union agenda. Edited June 29, 2012 by TimG

[bleeding heart]

ROTFLMAO. Sorry. Don't believe it. The NDP are too wedded to their big government/big union agenda.

The union point we can let go, but "big government"?

The Conservatives are extremely pro-Big-Government...unless we deem rhetoric more important than behaviour.

Or unless, as the more thoughtless "libertarians" postulate, "Big Government" means explicitly and only social spending and taxes.

But it means much more than that.

[TimG]

The Conservatives are extremely pro-Big-Government.

Why because spending went up when a large chunk of that increase is due to long established entitlement programs? Not an argument. Conservatives have not created any new entitlement programs and have tried to hold the line on others. There are a few one off events which were disasters (G20 summit) but as one-off events they don't increase the size of government. The only thing where conservative policies have increased spending over what it might have been otherwise are prisons but those costs are small compared to the big ticket items like heathcare and pesnions.

"Big Government" means explicitly and only social spending and taxes.

Big governmnent is a philosophy. For example, the conservatives and the NDP may allocate the same number of dollars to 'child benefit' programs. The difference is the NDP would spend the money on unionized shops to warehouse children. The conservatives would give tax credits designed to make having one parent stay at home more economically viable. The NDP expands government power. The tory plan reduces it. Edited June 29, 2012 by TimG

[bleeding heart]

Why because spending went up when a large chunk of that increase is due to long established entitlement programs? Not an argument. Conservatives have not created any new entitlement programs and have tried to hold the line on others. There are a few one off events which were disasters (G20 summit) but as one-off events they don't increase the size of government. The only thing where conservative policies have increased spending over what it might have been otherwise are prisons but those costs are small compared to the big ticket items like heathcare and pesnions.

As I pointed out elsewhere, most conservatives support a certain big-ticket item called "healthcare."

I don't know why you keep bringing up a cherished part of what conservatives want as if it's something they oppsoe. Outside a couple far-right think tanks dreaming of Insurance Booms, and Harper's opinion, on which he's remained silent in a poltiically-intelligent manner....nobody wants the health care system gutted and privatized.

Certainly not Conservative voters.

Big governmnent is a philosophy.

The tough-on-crime" stance is explicitly a call for bigger government. The expressed wishes for greater surveillance powers (as well as their already-in-place expansions, which the Conservatives endorse) are unquestionably Big Government.

An expressed desire to commit to greater military expenditures?

that's big government, too. It doesn't matter if it's a good idea or not...it remains a "big government" ideal.

Harper embraces big government...he only doesn't embrace social spending (which, contrary to extremely lazy claims, are not in and of themselves "big government", or not in the scary way of the scatter-brained pseudo-libertariasn among us, most of whom wish for a return of the death penalty! (THE biggest of "Big government" initiatives in existence, bar none.)

To a sadly large extent, much of the "big government" scaremongering is only about frigging taxes!

Authoritarianism is the bigger deal. And while the Conservatives have made a couple of good moves on this front (the HRCs, for example, and Section 13) I don't think anyone's accusing the Tories of lacking in authoritarian tendencies.

....

And just by the way, what of this?:

The conservatives would give tax credits designed to make having one parent stay at home more economically viable.

what kind of monstrously bloated "tax credit" allows a person to stop earning income?

Quite the entitlement mentality such a scheme endorses, eh?

Edited June 29, 2012 by bleeding heart

[CPCFTW]

The union point we can let go, but "big government"?

The Conservatives are extremely pro-Big-Government...unless we deem rhetoric more important than behaviour.

Or unless, as the more thoughtless "libertarians" postulate, "Big Government" means explicitly and only social spending and taxes.

But it means much more than that.

Thousands of federal govt workers just got selected for layoffs this week.

GDP grew 0.3% in April (released today), while the public sector shrunk. More details are available on the statscan website.

I'm looking forward to a balanced budget just in time for Harper to be re-elected.

[WWWTT]

I just checked out this clip.

Sounds like Mulcair is coming out swinging hard!And good for him!

WWWTT