Jump to content

Whoever you support, it is time to move on


Recommended Posts

I sincerely want to understand why such a large number of Canadians continue to support the Liberals. We have heard accusations on both sides and here are the most prominent:

1) Fear that without the liberals, the Quebec separtist movement will surge. Separtism has never had so much support and why? The Liberals and their sponsorship scandal.

2) Fear that the NDP or Conservatives will ruin the country economically and socially respectively. I understand the NDP fear but still perhaps they should be given a chance and the last I checked the Conservative policy on social issues (Gay Marriage, Abortion, etc) is to do the will of Canadians. Hmm - Why are we so suceptable to unsubstantiated fearmongering? Just because the Conservatives or NDP have a few wild extemists in their party doesn't mean the party is destructive. Aren't differing views the key to constructive democracy?

3) Contention that the opposition only wants power. Lets face it guys, ALL politicians want power. That is the reason they went in it. You need power to initiate change. When someone curses Martin or Harper for being driven for power it is like saying people are greedy for working. What is important is whether the politician remains honest and principled despite his yearning to take the reigns.

Anyways, Whatever your political contentions, it is time to remove the Liberals. Vote for them again in four years if you like their platform but it is clear that they are now, understandably after being in power for so long, corrupt and wasteful. If you are a left leaning liberal vote NDP and if you are a right leaning liberal vote Conservative. Please, for the sake of democracy, do not vote Liberal!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Anyways, Whatever your political contentions, it is time to remove the Liberals.  Vote for them again in four years if you like their platform but it is clear that they are now, understandably after being in power for so long, corrupt and wasteful.  If you are a left leaning liberal vote NDP and if you are a right leaning liberal vote Conservative.  Please, for the sake of democracy, do not vote Liberal!

All parties of all stripes make mistakes while in power, the Liberals are no different. An informed voter must balance these mistakes against the good things done. On the whole Liberals have managed the country and economy pretty well in the last 12 years: taxes are down and jobs are up. Many people recognize this that that is why the CPC is having trouble increasing its support.

Furthermore, there is absolutely no evidence that all or even a large number of Liberals are guilty of corruption. All the evidence at the Gomery inquiry seems to confirm that a relatively small group of Liberals were acting without the knowledge or control of most Liberals. By accusing all Liberals of being corrupt, the CPC violates the sense of fairness that most Canadians have. That is sense of fairness is why most Canadians want to wait for the Gomery report.

Lastly, the worst enemy of the CPC is George Bush and the Republicans right. Most Canadians are repelled by the far right in US and way too often Steven Harper sounds like he shares their ideology. It is true that the CPC has tried to moderate its position but many people are concerned that is just an ruse to grab power. The CPC really needs to prove to centrist Canadians that it is not the US republican party in disguise. Steven Harper could do this by dropping opposition to the gay marriage bill and by indicating that he will not support any private members bill that tries to restrict access to abortion.

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, let me illustrate for you:

*knock on the door, door opens*

Adolf: Hi, I'm Adolf Hitler, can I count on your vote?

Joe: Adolf Hitler! But you're EVIL! I'd NEVER vote for you!

*slams door*

The Next Day.....

*knock on the door, door opens*

Adolf: Hi, I'm Tom, can I count on your vote?

Joe: Sure!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scarhawk - I appreciate your reply. The reasons for Canada's strong economy is quite debatable (probably depends if you ask a conservative or a Liberal) and attributing to the Liberals is superficial at best.

I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that Harper's support for the Americans wasn't rooted in the nature of the administration but in the traditional alliance America and Canada have enjoyed. Canadians, as you said, commit the gross simplification of connecting Bush's replublicans with Harpers conservatives. Harper, if anyone would actually listen to the substance of his words, supported "our allies" and maintains the significance of US-Canada relations. Why is that evil? It is true that the popular culture in Canada has shifted more and more to an anti-American stance but as the nations leader I would hope that maintaining and strengthening relations with our leading trade partner and most important ally would be important.

Anyways - ScottBrison (in reference to the poster and not the MP) ironically displays his similarity to the Nazi party by jumping into the popular bandwagon against the conservatives. Enjoy your trip Scott.

Justin Anderson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scarhawk - I appreciate your reply.  The reasons for Canada's strong economy is quite debatable (probably depends if you ask a conservative or a Liberal) and attributing to the Liberals is superficial at best.

I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that Harper's support for the Americans wasn't rooted in the nature of the administration but in the traditional alliance America and Canada have enjoyed.  Canadians, as you said, commit the gross simplification of connecting Bush's replublicans with Harpers conservatives.  Harper, if anyone would actually listen to the substance of his words, supported "our allies" and maintains the significance of US-Canada relations.  Why is that evil?  It is true that the popular culture in Canada has shifted more and more to an anti-American stance but as the nations leader I would hope that maintaining and strengthening relations with our leading trade partner and most important ally would be important.

Anyways - ScottBrison (in reference to the poster and not the MP) ironically displays his similarity to the Nazi party by jumping into the popular bandwagon against the conservatives.  Enjoy your trip Scott.

Justin Anderson

What fools you all are. I pity you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scarhawk - I appreciate your reply.  The reasons for Canada's strong economy is quite debatable (probably depends if you ask a conservative or a Liberal) and attributing to the Liberals is superficial at best.

Agreed. But the governing party tends to get credit for good or bad economies whether they deserve it or not. I was answering your question why people are reluctant to remove the Liberals - its the 'things aren't so bad - why rock the boat' type of thinking.

I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that Harper's support for the Americans wasn't rooted in the nature of the administration but in the traditional alliance America and Canada have enjoyed.

I wasn't referring to Harper's support of US-friendly policies such as missle defence (which I support BTW). I am refering to the hard right politics of the neo-cons in the US. Many people are afraid that there are many US style neo-cons hiding in the bushes of the CPC and they do not really believe the assurances and public declarations of moderate CPC policies. Harper really needs to learn from the BC Liberals. They are an economically conservative party that does not touch social issues with a 10 foot pole. As result, they had no problem getting elected.

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyways, Whatever your political contentions, it is time to remove the Liberals.  Vote for them again in four years if you like their platform but it is clear that they are now, understandably after being in power for so long, corrupt and wasteful.  If you are a left leaning liberal vote NDP and if you are a right leaning liberal vote Conservative.  Please, for the sake of democracy, do not vote Liberal!

They shouldn't even be an available option at this point. The Liberal Party should be suspended for their corruption, and not even be allowed to run in the next election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They shouldn't even be an available option at this point. The Liberal Party should be suspended for their corruption, and not even be allowed to run in the next election.

There is absolutely no evidence that all or even a large number of Liberals are guilty of corruption. All the evidence at the Gomery inquiry seems to confirm that a relatively small group of Liberals were acting without the knowledge or control of most Liberals. How you like to be accused of being theif because a co-worker stole something from your employer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is absolutely no evidence that all or even a large number of Liberals are guilty of corruption. All the evidence at the Gomery inquiry seems to confirm that a relatively small group of Liberals were acting without the knowledge or control of most Liberals

I sure hope this holds true in Fraser's new investigation,because we sure can't afford another election. We have spent enough money already trying to maintain power as it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest eureka

What if someone is a Liberal and believes in the Liberal programme as the plurality of voters do according to the polls. How is it then time to remove the Liberals "whatever your political contentions?"

"For the sake of democracy do not vote Liberal." How do you equate that with voting Liberal?" I would think that for the sake of democracy one should vote one's beliefs.

That means anyone but the Conservatives "for the sake of democracy." It is the Conservative vague platform that would stifle democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Noone has answered my first question except "if someone is a Liberal and believes in the Liberal programme"

Please explain what the Liberal program is in detail. (minus the rhetoric)

"How you like to be accused of being theif because a co-worker stole something from your employer?"

I love the deep thinkers among us. Of course not every Liberal is corrupt. Some, if not a good number, are probably well intended. If I hire a company to put in my carpet and 2 of the 5 guys installing it our stealing my money and doing a crappy job, I fire the company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the deep thinkers among us.  Of course not every Liberal is corrupt.  Some, if not a good number, are probably well intended.  If I hire a company to put in my carpet and 2 of the 5 guys installing it our stealing my money and doing a crappy job, I fire the company.

Your analogy only makes if there are other carpet installers around that can do the job. Political parties are not interchangable and that is the problem. Hell would freeze over before I voted NDP and the CPC has failed to convince me that they are capable of being the fiscally conservative but socially liberal. That means I have no choice but to trust that the Liberals have learned their lesson that they will make sure the guilty are punished and that systems are put in place to make sure this kind of thing does not happen again. I know there are enough 'well intended' people in the Liberal party that they will likely be able to fix the problems if given a chance.

That said, if the CPC wants my vote then they are going have to do a lot more than run around calling the Liberals crooks (You just admitted yourself that most of them probably aren't). The Harper could start by dropping his opposition to gay marriage - it would be a powerful sign that shows he is willing to keep the far right wing nuts that fill the CPC back benches in line.

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sparhawk

That is sense of fairness is why most Canadians want to wait for the Gomery report.
I can tell by this post and your answer to my post concerning Belinda And her motivation for joining with the corrupt Lieberals. First of all the leader of the Lieberals was involved in the sponsorship program by virtue of his being Finance Monister when this theft was going on. One of two things are quite apparent. Either he was incompetent in his post as Finance Minister by not making himself aware of where the money was being misappropriated to. Or, he knew all along what was going on and chose to turn a blind eye, and let it happen. In both cases he is culpable, and has no right to expect Canadian's to trust him. Quebecer's certainly don't trust him, and that says volumes about his character, or lack of.

You talk about waiting for the results of the Gomery inquiry. Judging by an article I read on Canada Free Press which detailed the mandatre handed to Justice Gomery to conduct his inquiry, section (K) basically ties the hands of Justice Gomery so that in the end he cannot express any conclusion or recommendation regarding the civil or criminal liability of any person or organization. Martin told the Canadian people that this inquiry would get to the bottom of this issue. Was he outright lying or is this just another smoke and mirrors exercise in the hopes that Canadian's penchant for shrt-term memory loss kicks in before he has to face the voters again? I would suggest that this is all that it is, and that is why he is now traipsing across the country spending money that he didn't supposedly have when the Premier's were looking for healthcare dollars and our military personnel wer dying in inferior helicopters and submarines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all the leader of the Lieberals was involved in the sponsorship program by virtue of his being Finance Monister when this theft was going on. One of two things are quite apparent. Either he was incompetent in his post as Finance Minister by not making himself aware of where the money was being misappropriated to. Or, he knew all along what was going on and chose to turn a blind eye, and let it happen. In both cases he is culpable, and has no right to expect Canadian's to trust him. Quebecer's certainly don't trust him, and that says volumes about his character, or lack of.

This is another fiction propagated the conservative party. I say this because:

1) The annual federal budget is $140 billion/year. The misappropriated sponsership money may add up to $100 million over several years. It is completely unreasonable to expect someone responsible for so much money to know where every penny is spent.

2) The people doing the misappropriation went out of their way to hide what they were doing. It is unreasonable to expect anyone in authority to immediately discover such activities. In fact, the audit process which involves the auditor general _is_ one of the mechanisms that the Finance minister relies on to discover fraud.

3) The Minister of Finance is responsible for allocating budgets to different categories. The responsibility for ensuring the money is spent correctly falls on the minister over seeing the department spending the money. In other words, it was not Paul Martin's job to know where the money went.

People making the accusations that Paul Martin "should have known" seem to be expect gov't to set up a secret audit process that can find fraud before the auditor general does. This would be a pointless duplication of functions. The fact is the fraud can happen in every organization and there is no evidence that Paul Martin or any other capable person in his position could have detected the problem sooner. Nor is there any evidence that Paul Martin knew what was going on and simply ignored it.

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All parties of all stripes make mistakes while in power, the Liberals are no different. An informed voter must balance these mistakes against the good things done. On the whole Liberals have managed the country and economy pretty well in the last 12 years: taxes are down and jobs are up. Many people recognize this that that is why the CPC is having trouble increasing its support.

I can remember when Canada was described as a golden country with a golden future. Well, it never happened. Money has been pouring into federal coffers for the last ten years, and what have they accomplished with it? Health care continues to deteriorate without any attention being paid to it. Family poverty and child poverty are holding steady or rising. Family income is falling. Disposable income is falling. Fewer people own their own homes. The Justice system is a clanking, rusting mess out of the reach of ordinary Canadians, and thoroughly corrupt. The military is falling apart. We have an antique railway system, a bankrupt national airline, and a highway system badly in need of billions and billions of dollars in repairs. No one respects government anymore - with good reason, as all levels of govenrment are filled with venal, self-serving, dishonest people.

And this is what you consider to be a good job?

Furthermore, there is absolutely no evidence that all or even a large number of Liberals are guilty of corruption. All the evidence at the Gomery inquiry seems to confirm that a relatively small group of Liberals were acting without the knowledge or control of most Liberals.
Yes, the small group of Liberals who were in charge, including the Prime Minister, his senior aids, and his cabinet. Anyone who thinks that this was done without the knowledge and active support of Jean Chretien is a blithering idiot. Anyone who thinks Paul Maritn wasn't fully aware of what was going on is just as bad.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They shouldn't even be an available option at this point. The Liberal Party should be suspended for their corruption, and not even be allowed to run in the next election.

There is absolutely no evidence that all or even a large number of Liberals are guilty of corruption. All the evidence at the Gomery inquiry seems to confirm that a relatively small group of Liberals were acting without the knowledge or control of most Liberals.

Indeed, the small group of Liberals who were in charge, including the Prime Minister, his aids, his cabinet, and most or all of the top non-political hierarchy of the Liberal party. They were either involved or knew about the money. No one can seriously doubt that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, the small group of Liberals who were in charge, including the Prime Minister, his aids, his cabinet, and most or all of the top non-political hierarchy of the Liberal party. They were either involved or knew about the money. No one can seriously doubt that.

There is a lot of evidence that people close to Jean Chretien were involved. It appears that Gagliano was certainly involved. However, both of these people and almost everyone that worked with them are out of power replaced by Martin's people.

The entire 'Liberal's are corrupt' mythology rests on the idea that Paul Martin must be guilty until he proves himself innocent. However, there is no evidence that Martin was involved - only hearsay from people who cannot really be trusted such as Chuck Guite. Accusing Martin of being involved is pure opportunism on the part of the Convervatives and the Bloq that many Canadians can see right through this. People who believe that people are innocent until proven guilty are not stupid: they are being reasonable.

All of this would be a moot point if the CPC would find a way to pull their act together and make it clear that social conservatives are not welcome in their party and they will not backrupt the country by making ideologically driven tax cuts that create massive deficits.

Frankly, I am disgusted with Harper he had the power to keep the Liberals in line and decided to piss it away in mindless grab for power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

idea that Paul Martin must be guilty until he proves himself innocent. However, there is no evidence that Martin was involved - only hearsay from people who cannot really be trusted such as Chuck Guite.

Okay what you need is a third party to do the deal and we must not talk about details so you can say truthfully you didn't know.

Do these words ring a bell from this week?

All of this would be a moot point if the CPC would find a way to pull their act together and make it clear that social conservatives are not welcome in their party and they will not backrupt the country by making ideologically driven tax cuts that create massive deficits.

Fist off social conservatives should be welcome in the party as they should be in the NDP and the Liberals. Tommy Douglas was a social conservative and he made great changes to this country. The larger point is that the party is and needs to be broader than the social conservatives. Caring for poor people and the environment are part of social conservatism. Think about it.

As for the economic implications of a conservative government, they have been very conservative in platform. Your comment is ridiculous in the light of what the Liberal government has been spending in the last month. If they stay in power until the end of the year they will spend us into massive deficit, even in a time when the interest rates are low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay what you need is a third party to do the deal and we must not talk about details so you can say truthfuly you didn't know.

Do these words ring a bell from this week?

And your point is? Just because you can dream up scenarios were Paul Martin could have been involved but the evidence can't be found does not mean it is true - it is just more unfounded innuendo.

If actual evidence shows up that Martin is involved I would expect him to step down as leader and call an election. But for now I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and that is what many other Canadians feel as well.

Harper and the conservatives seem to think that these allegations of corruption should give them a free ticket to power. The fact that Canadians at this point in time are not willing to give the conservatives that free ticket makes the conservatives condescending and self-rightous. The conservatives should look in the mirror and ask themselves why they are not sitting at 50% polls. Blaming the media or calling voters stupid is not enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And your point is? Just because you can dream up scenarios were Paul Martin could have been involved but the evidence can't be found does not mean it is true - it is just more unfounded innuendo.

These words came from his PMO on a tape on Monday. This is Paul Martins PMO right.

Hey I am not looking for criminal conviction right now, only an election so that we can resort some legitimacy to the PMO. Unfounded would mean no reason and we have plenty of reasons to suspect his knowledge of party practices.

As for the dream up, I could not dream up the stuff coming out to Gomery.

The scary thing is Gomery is only looking into this one file. Every time Sheila Fraser reports we hear the words "questionable practices". Where is all the money in going. To steal a line from the left, in this instance we should use the precautionary principle. They should have to prove they are not harming and not the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This should be the new approach taken on the Liberal government. Seems to fit that they may be doing a magnitude of damage as can be shown with the growth in support for Quebec sovereignty, our environment is not improving, we are losing our place as a broker of peace in the world, we have a declining health care system and the trust in our democratic institutions has been shaken. Let them prove they didn't do it.

Precautionary Principle:

We believe there is compelling evidence that damage to humans

and the worldwide environment is of such magnitude and

seriousness that new principles for conducting human activities

are necessary.

"While we realize that human activities may involve hazards,

people must proceed more carefully than has been the case in

recent history. Corporations, government entities, organizations,

communities, scientists and other individuals must adopt a

precautionary approach to all human endeavors.

"Therefore, it is necessary to implement the Precautionary

Principle: When an activity raises threats of harm to human

health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken

even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully

established scientifically.  In this context the proponent of an

activity, rather than the public, should bear the burden of proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey I am not looking for criminal conviction right now, only an election so that we can resort some legitimacy to the PMO.

Strangely enough, I agree. However, right now the conservatives have no hope of winning any seats from the BQ in Quebec (they could potentially get a seat or two from the liberals, however, the would most likely split the federalist vote and hand even more ridings to the BQ). Furthermore, the new party funding system which is based on number of votes cast would give a huge financial advantage to the seperatists in future elections.

For that reason, an election right now is a very bad idea. I would rather see the conservatives focus on changes to the accounting system that would ensure abuses like what occurred could never happen again. There are enough honest liberals in ottawa that the conservatives should be able to work with them. However, as long as the conservatives keep calling them all crooks any sort of positve change is impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sparhawk, the next practical time to try and topple the Liberals wont be until fall. So the Conservatives have a few months of hard work ahead. If the Liberals win the bye election, the Conservatives will need the NDP to topple the government so the ball will be in there court. Conservatives continue to oppose the government as oppositions do.

It is odd but all political strips would like to see a government that has the confidence of the electorate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, the small group of Liberals who were in charge, including the Prime Minister, his aids, his cabinet, and most or all of the top non-political hierarchy of the Liberal party. They were either involved or knew about the money. No one can seriously doubt that.

There is a lot of evidence that people close to Jean Chretien were involved. It appears that Gagliano was certainly involved. However, both of these people and almost everyone that worked with them are out of power replaced by Martin's people.

Not all the Liberals alleged to be involved are out of power. There are quite a number of them still acting as aids to various ministers, or as parliamentary assistants or in other positions.
The entire 'Liberal's are corrupt' mythology rests on the idea that Paul Martin must be guilty until he proves himself innocent.
Very few believe a political operator with his extensive network of contacts in Quebec knew nothing about this. And there have been a number of allegations that the only objection Martin might have made would have been that he wanted more of the money directed towards companies which supported him.
However, there is no evidence that Martin was involved - only hearsay from people who cannot really be trusted such as Chuck Guite.
Sworn testimony is not hearsay. And there have been other allegations, including from that longtime Liberal dirt maker Warren Kinsella, and from the then quebec liberal party president that Martin wanted money directed to his own supporters.
Accusing Martin of being involved is pure opportunism on the part of the Convervatives
Most Canadians, in polls taken since, believe Martin lied on the stand about his knowledge, and that he is still lying. The Tories aren't inventing these accusations.
All of this would be a moot point if the CPC would find a way to pull their act together and make it clear that social conservatives are not welcome in their party
So social conservatives don't deserve any kind of representatioin? Their views are so illegitimate they should be cast out in the cold? How come the Liberals don't do that to their own social conservatives then?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...