Queenmandy85 Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 4 hours ago, blackbird said: Then after he was elected he became a dictator and brought in all kinds of things the people never voted for. Do you have some examples of things that were not approved by Parliament? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said: Do you have some examples of things that were not approved by Parliament? It is a kind dictatorship. The people have one vote but do not set the agenda. One vote followed by a four year dictatorship. He brought in all kinds of things most Canadians were never asked or told about, and spent Canada more deeply into debt than it has ever been. That the way the system works. Who was ever asked or had any say? Four billion dollars spend in Iraq since 2016 and our health care system is failing. Edited January 13 by blackbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 2 hours ago, blackbird said: It is a kind dictatorship. The people have one vote but do not set the agenda. One vote followed by a four year dictatorship. He brought in all kinds of things most Canadians were never asked or told about, and spent Canada more deeply into debt than it has ever been. That the way the system works. Who was ever asked or had any say? Four billion dollars spend in Iraq since 2016 and our health care system is failing. People set the agenda. There are many ways to do this. It's not four years of dictatorship in the slighest. And that's when it's a majority - right now these days we have mostly minorities. Claiming it's a 'dictatorship' and we're 'helpless' is what people say when they want to excuse the fact they didn't get off their butts and do something about what they didn't like. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 13 Author Report Share Posted January 13 7 hours ago, blackbird said: It is a kind dictatorship. The people have one vote but do not set the agenda. One vote followed by a four year dictatorship. That's interesting, you summarized it so well! How can you fail to make the next step: it's the system that is engineered and set up this way, not a fault of someone who just decided to use, not even to the max for all it allows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 1 minute ago, myata said: That's interesting, you summarized it so well! How can you fail to make the next step: it's the system that is engineered and set up this way, not a fault of someone who just decided to use, not even to the max for all it allows? But he's wrong. Then again - the fact you agree with him is proof of that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 13 Author Report Share Posted January 13 One cannot prove wrong with endless repetition of falsities, misconceptions and plain lies. This is exactly what it looks like; objective and factual appearance; and therefore, the real essence of the matter. Proven by observation and fact. A majority (or de-facto) PM in Canada has the powers of a king. They cannot be checked or stopped, if needed, by anything. "We could consider bringing charges but we can't be sure if They can allow themselves anything". A fact. Who is h@king sure of anything, in the entire country, who can be? The talking heads, on a good Thursday? Where is the line between carelessness; incompetence and a grotesque parody? Does it even exist any longer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 18 minutes ago, myata said: "We could consider bringing charges but we can't be sure if They can allow themselves anything". A fact. That is not the fact at all. This was specific to receiving bribes. The law says that gov't officials can't take bribes (essentially) unless their boss allows. (this is to allow gifts in very specific cases if necessary). The problem is that the prime minister is the top boss in the gov't. (yes - the gg is head of state but that's different). So the question was can the PM be considered his own boss and if so can the PM then give himself permission to accept a bribe. Not "Can they allow themselves to do anything". Unlike the states for example they can't have a political rival assassinated Or just break any law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 13 Author Report Share Posted January 13 (edited) Nobody knows the answer. Were the circumstances very special? Requiring it for the country, not personal benefit? None, in the whole land knows. Nobody can know. That's pretty much, the answer in itself. Edited January 13 by myata Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 13 hours ago, blackbird said: It is a kind dictatorship. The people have one vote but do not set the agenda. One vote followed by a four year dictatorship. He brought in all kinds of things most Canadians were never asked or told about, and spent Canada more deeply into debt than it has ever been. That the way the system works. Who was ever asked or had any say? Four billion dollars spend in Iraq since 2016 and our health care system is failing. I have to respectfully disagree. The government proposes and Pailiament decides. The person you elected to make these decisions on your and my behalf, is your MP. Can you imagine the chaos if the government had to ask the voters to approve every piece of legislation? I do not have the resources to research the pros and cons of aid to Iraq. Nor am I equiped to make decisions on how to fix the healthcare system. It is interesting that the two example you provide are foreign aid and healthcare. One is federal responsibility and one is provincial. The problems in health care are partly the result of the deadliest pandemic in a century (over one million Americans and almost 60,000 Canadians dead) and the reluctance of voters to pay taxes. If voters had to make all the decisions, they would want all the services to be first class and not have to pay for them. No country can operate that way. So, we elect the best and the brightest of our neighbours to go to Parliament. Their job is to learn as much as possible about the legislation the government proposes. They have access to resources you and I don't, and they have the time to spend studying the feasibility of each decision to make a decision on our behalf. They do these things as part of a group of other MP's called committees. They also meet in a caucus of generally like minded MP's to further examine the business of government. If your MP is not good enough, that is on you. You should have worked harder to elect some one better. If you didn't campaign, you can't complain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 13 Author Report Share Posted January 13 6 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said: The person you elected to make these decisions on your and my behalf, is your MP. OK the beavertale. You can't seriously believe that, not possible. Then, who does it make you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said: I have to respectfully disagree. The government proposes and Pailiament decides. The person you elected to make these decisions on your and my behalf, is your MP. Can you imagine the chaos if the government had to ask the voters to approve every piece of legislation? I do not have the resources to research the pros and cons of aid to Iraq. Nor am I equiped to make decisions on how to fix the healthcare system. It is interesting that the two example you provide are foreign aid and healthcare. One is federal responsibility and one is provincial. The problems in health care are partly the result of the deadliest pandemic in a century (over one million Americans and almost 60,000 Canadians dead) and the reluctance of voters to pay taxes. If voters had to make all the decisions, they would want all the services to be first class and not have to pay for them. No country can operate that way. So, we elect the best and the brightest of our neighbours to go to Parliament. Their job is to learn as much as possible about the legislation the government proposes. They have access to resources you and I don't, and they have the time to spend studying the feasibility of each decision to make a decision on our behalf. They do these things as part of a group of other MP's called committees. They also meet in a caucus of generally like minded MP's to further examine the business of government. If your MP is not good enough, that is on you. You should have worked harder to elect some one better. If you didn't campaign, you can't complain. I understand you are an obedient liberal who has complete trust in the system and the dictator. I respectfully disagree. I believe the people are conned by the liberal clique and the government supported media. We have seen a continual string of ethics violations and there is no accountability. They can pretty well do whatever they wish. Ask the opposition or even people like Jody Wilson Reabeault and other liberal MPs who have been shown the door. Edited January 13 by blackbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 9 hours ago, myata said: Nobody knows the answer. Were the circumstances very special? Requiring it for the country, not personal benefit? None, in the whole land knows. Nobody can know. That's pretty much, the answer in itself. The answer can be decided easily enough by a judge. No the circumstances weren't special. And they do know - he was convicted of wrongdoing by the ethics people. And of course people can know (and do). Now go and change your diapers, you appear to have crapped yourself again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 3 hours ago, blackbird said: I understand you are an obedient liberal who has complete trust in the system and the dictator. I respectfully disagree. I believe the people are conned by the liberal clique and the government supported media. We have seen a continual string of ethics violations and there is no accountability. They can pretty well do whatever they wish. Ask the opposition or even people like Jody Wilson Reabeault and other liberal MPs who have been shown the door. Actually, I am a loyal Progressive Conservative, so I have no party to affiliate with. My MP is in the CPC caucus and he is an excellent MP. If you are unhappy with your MP's efforts to curb the Liberals, why don't you work to elect an MP closer to your views. Remember, the government can only do what Parliament lets them. If your MP lacks the backbone to vote against the Trudeau government, nominate someone who will, get out there and campaign for them and get them elected. Remember, elections are won by the candidates who get all of their supporters to vote. Of course, if other voters want someone different than you do, then your candidate will lose. But every MP represents every Canadian. Find an MP who represents your views and work through her. When a government misbehaves, it is because too many voters are too lazy to put in the work. That old saying, "government by the people, for the people, etc.," only works if the people participate. Politics is a participation sport. You refer to the Prime Minister as a "dictator." How can he be a dictator when he depends, not only on the support of cabinet, but also the support of caucus and Parliament. If he was a dictator, how were a group of east coast MP's able to force him to do that home heating oil carve-out? Because you know the Prime Minister really did not want it. It was a gift to the CPC and he knew it but MP's have power and they forced him to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted January 13 Report Share Posted January 13 (edited) 4 hours ago, myata said: OK the beavertale. You can't seriously believe that, not possible. Then, who does it make you? Coming from a person who makes a point over and over again that you do not know anything about politics and you refuse to learn, you may wish to take your own advice and stay away from it. If you do not like politics, what are you doing here? In your own words on Christmas Eve, "You don't have to play." Edited January 13 by Queenmandy85 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 14 Author Report Share Posted January 14 11 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said: do not know anything about politics No but you stated that MPs make their own decisions voting on your behalf and representing you. This is not true, factually as knows anyone having the least of a clue about Canadian politics. So why have you said something that is, patently not true? Who does that make you, again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted January 14 Report Share Posted January 14 1 hour ago, myata said: No but you stated that MPs make their own decisions voting on your behalf and representing you. This is not true, factually as knows anyone having the least of a clue about Canadian politics. So why have you said something that is, patently not true? Who does that make you, again? It is in fact true you uneducated buffoon. Aside from whipped votes mp's vote how they want. And there's been more than one backbench revolt in our history as well as far as whipped votes go. And even more importantly, they get to speak out freely during caucus. They can take your ideas and 'sell' them to get support. They can even put forward private members bills and many have done so in defiance of party policy on all sides. He's right little guy - every time you open your mouth you demonstrate you know nothing of how politics works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 14 Author Report Share Posted January 14 (edited) Look someone thought that "representing" means deciding and delivering the results but in fact, it's just "speaking" (and raking the benefits, to mention). Why would anyone care about this most insignificant of differences? Would you like to rake a small fortune with a lifetime pension in just a few years only for speaking your mind, Joe? That's just too bad for ya. We know. Edited January 14 by myata Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 14 Author Report Share Posted January 14 (edited) On 1/12/2024 at 7:09 PM, Queenmandy85 said: were not approved by Parliament? Did you manage to keep a straight face, while typing it? Edited January 14 by myata Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted January 14 Report Share Posted January 14 (edited) 21 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said: , nominate someone who will, get out there and campaign for them and get them elected. Remember, elections are won by the candidates who get all of their supporters to vote. Of course, if other voters want someone different than you do, then your candidate will lose. But every MP represents every Canadian. Find an MP who represents your views and work through her. When a government misbehaves, it is because too many voters are too lazy to put in the work. T With all due respect, I think you have been duped into believing individuals can have significant influence by working your butt off in parties and elections. I have been there and done that and it makes absolutely no difference in the larger scheme of things. The system just doesn't work that way. It was largely a huge waste of time and emotional energy that accomplished nothing. In fact western Canada has very little to no influence on the outcome of federal elections. The federal liberals have it all controlled by an inner circle of elite political hacks centred in the triangle of Montreal, Toronto, and Ottawa. They have a large base of supporters in Quebec who will vote Liberal no matter what. They don't really care about government performance or what is going on. They vote for a favourite Quebec son who gets the job by inheritance and name. Also Quebec is paid off by the Liberals to make sure they vote liberal. A good example of that is the equalization payments and all the powers Quebec has to run like an independent country. Edited January 14 by blackbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted January 14 Report Share Posted January 14 20 minutes ago, blackbird said: With all due respect, I think you have been duped into believing individuals can have significant influence by working your butt of in local parties and elections. I have been there and done that and it makes absolutely no difference in the larger scheme of things. The system just doesn't work that way. It was largely a huge waste of time and emotional energy that accomplished nothing. In fact western Canada has very little to no influence on the outcome of federal elections. The federal liberals have it all controlled by an inner circle of elite political hacks centred in the triangle of Montreal, Toronto, and Ottawa. They have a large base of supporters in Quebec who will vote Liberal no matter what. They don't really care about government performance of what is going on. They vote for a favourite Quebec son who gets the job by inheritance and name. Also Quebec is paid off by the Liberals to make sure they vote liberal. A good example of that is the equalization payments and all the powers Quebec has to run like an independent country. Geography dictates where the population lives. That is why eastern Canada has the economic and political power. It is worth bearing in mind that 10 years ago, the grits were in third place so we can't say they have some kind of lock on the votes in Quebec. In another year an a half, they will be the third party again and it will be the CPC with the lock on power. Will having 200 seats make Prime Minister Poilievre a dictator? The transfer of power won't have a significant change. Equalization payments won't change. The Liberal Government is investing 35 billion to increase the flow of oil from Alberta to tidewater. So, it isn't just Quebec that is getting paid off. You under estimate the Bloc as a factor in Quebec. The only province in which the Liberals are dominant is Prince Edward Island. They are leading in three out of four seats. In Quebec, the Liberals are almost tied with the Bloc (33-32), and the CPC are dominant in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario. The only factor that puts the CPC victory in peril is if Mr. Poilievre implodes in the next few months. Not likely. (Based on the polling analysis of Canada 338 posted on Jan. 7, 2024) As for individuals having an influence, an election has phases. In a riding, when the writ is dropped, canvassers go out and knock on doors. The purpose is to identify voters who support the candidate. On election day, a special campaign crew swings into action. Their purpose is to keep track of every supporter to ensure they vote. No excuse is acceptable. The campaign will provide rides to the polls, and overcome any obstacle. Bob Stanfield lost the 1972 election because approximately 100 Progressive Conservative voters across the country in very close races, were too busy to vote. He lost by 2 seats. The election day team in those two ridings did not do their jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted January 14 Report Share Posted January 14 14 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said: Geography dictates where the population lives. That is why eastern Canada has the economic and political power. It is worth bearing in mind that 10 years ago, the grits were in third place so we can't say they have some kind of lock on the votes in Quebec. In another year an a half, they will be the third party again and it will be the CPC with the lock on power. Will having 200 seats make Prime Minister Poilievre a dictator? The transfer of power won't have a significant change. Equalization payments won't change. The Liberal Government is investing 35 billion to increase the flow of oil from Alberta to tidewater. So, it isn't just Quebec that is getting paid off. You under estimate the Bloc as a factor in Quebec. The only province in which the Liberals are dominant is Prince Edward Island. They are leading in three out of four seats. In Quebec, the Liberals are almost tied with the Bloc (33-32), and the CPC are dominant in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario. The only factor that puts the CPC victory in peril is if Mr. Poilievre implodes in the next few months. Not likely. (Based on the polling analysis of Canada 338 posted on Jan. 7, 2024) As for individuals having an influence, an election has phases. In a riding, when the writ is dropped, canvassers go out and knock on doors. The purpose is to identify voters who support the candidate. On election day, a special campaign crew swings into action. Their purpose is to keep track of every supporter to ensure they vote. No excuse is acceptable. The campaign will provide rides to the polls, and overcome any obstacle. Bob Stanfield lost the 1972 election because approximately 100 Progressive Conservative voters across the country in very close races, were too busy to vote. He lost by 2 seats. The election day team in those two ridings did not do their jobs. The system is really stacked against the common people. Look at the liberal stacked, unelected Senate for a start. Then look at the liberal appointed Supreme Court. The truth is that Canada is part of the world system which is inherently evil. Politics is a sport that is kind of crooked in some ways. The inside bagmen have control of a lot of things in politics. It is all part of a corrupt world system because we are all sinners. Most of the world are non-believers and therefore everything man does is tainted with sin in some way. It is a mistake to put a lot of faith in politics or the political system. It won't do much good. All we are doing is simply trying to survive and prevent things from getting much worse. We need to try to keep evil men and dictators from getting a lot of political power and control over everyone's life. That is very difficult to do. There are other things in everyday life that take priority to politic activities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted January 14 Report Share Posted January 14 Just now, Queenmandy85 said: With all due respect, I think you have been duped into believing individuals can have significant influence by working your butt of in local parties and elections. An election day team is a marvel to behold. Each poll has a scrutineer for the Party. She sits at the table with the DRO and the scrutineers of the other parties. They cross off the voters as they vote and runners from the campaign periodically come by and pick up the data sheets and provide new ones. The data is taken to the campaign office where they keep track of who has voted, and more importantly, which supported have not voted yet. The office will contact thos supporters to find out why they haven't voted and do what ever they can to get those people to the polls. That is where elections are won or lost. The deadliest phrase in any election is "It's in the bag." I heard Vic Stevens actually use those very words a month before election day in the by-election in which he was the PC's star candidate. He came third. There was a woman working in a diner in PEI in the 1972 election who was closing up early to go vote. She called the campaign office and asked if there was anyone else who hadn't voted. "Just those guys working on a construction site, but don't worry about it." She knew the guys on the crew and knew there were eight conservative voters among them. She borrowed a van and picked them up and got them to the poll at the last minute. She only picked up the tories. No grits. The Conservative Candidate won by 4 votes. You can't make me believe an individual does't have a significant influence. If campaign workers in two other ridings had shared her dedication, Pierre Trudeau would have lost the '72 election and Bob Stanfield would heve bee Prime Minister. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted January 14 Report Share Posted January 14 2 hours ago, blackbird said: With all due respect, I think you have been duped into believing individuals can have significant influence by working your butt off in parties and elections. Of course you can. I"ve been there too and had strong results. But there's a lot of other people also working on their priorities some of which may be in direct conflict with your priorities. So it becomes a question of how many people agree with you and how many agree with them. That's how democracy works. So some people do an election or two in the trenches, get mad that their wish list isn't fulfilled, and throw up their hands saying 'the system is broken'. Some MP's even do that. (Maxime.... Staaaaaaaaaaaarrrrreeeeee.....) It's been said that the goal of democracy is that over time everyone should be equally disappointed but you definitely can make a difference. You can also organize people, and there's a lot of free things that groups of people can do to get their message out. Democracy does take a bit of effort. But in the end you absolutely better believe individual people can have powerful results using the system . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted January 14 Report Share Posted January 14 (edited) 7 hours ago, blackbird said: The system is really stacked against the common people. Look at the liberal stacked, unelected Senate for a start. Then look at the liberal appointed Supreme Court. The truth is that Canada is part of the world system which is inherently evil. Politics is a sport that is kind of crooked in some ways. The inside bagmen have control of a lot of things in politics. It is all part of a corrupt world system because we are all sinners. Most of the world are non-believers and therefore everything man does is tainted with sin in some way. It is a mistake to put a lot of faith in politics or the political system. It won't do much good. All we are doing is simply trying to survive and prevent things from getting much worse. We need to try to keep evil men and dictators from getting a lot of political power and control over everyone's life. That is very difficult to do. There are other things in everyday life that take priority to politic activities. You finished with the most profound statment of this thread. "There are other things in everyday life that take priority to politic activities." That is very true. Thank you. Edited January 15 by Queenmandy85 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted January 15 Report Share Posted January 15 (edited) On 1/12/2024 at 4:09 PM, Queenmandy85 said: Do you have some examples of things that were not approved by Parliament? Lack of transparency under Trudeau. Massive national debt in the tens of billions. Housing crisis. Sending 4 billion dollars to the middle east since 2016. Giving tens of billions of dollars to subsidize electric vehicle battery plants. Increasing carbon taxes. Recognizing and honouring a known Nazi in Parliament. Slashing the Canadian Forces budget. A carbon tax carve-out for Atlantic Canada. These are just a few. I am sure there are dozens upon dozens of things. Edited January 15 by blackbird 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.