What does Quebec want?

[Charles Anthony]

Why do we continue to waste our time politically with a province that is the cause for a dysfunctional federal government?

We support a dysfunctional federal government because most rest-of-Canadians do not have the courage nor strength to stand on their own. They prefer the sense of security of hiding behind authority.

It has been said in the past that what Quebec wants is a strong independent Quebec within a strong united Canada......

Why is that so hard to understand?

It is difficult to understand because we keep talking about things that do not exist: treating the provinces as if they were 13 different people.

There is no political consensus among Quebeckers as there is none among the rest-of-Canadians with respect to politics and self-determination. It is only natural that discussions of politics and self-determination are impassible exercises at chasing eachother's tails. It makes equal sense to have 13 individuals each with multiple personality disorder sit at a table and discuss what "Quebec" wants.

Biggger government invariably leads to more individuals not getting what they want.

[M.Dancer]

There is no political consensus among Quebeckers as there is none among the rest-of-Canadians with respect to politics and self-determination.

I disagree. Now while some on the extreme would want a full and complete divorce, by far most Quebecers want to stay as part of Canada, but like the 9 other premiers, want more control. Even within the PQ, the spectrum on what the goal is ranges from a new federalism to sovereignty association to the extreme....but for the average jean....a final divorce is not the goal.

[Leafless]

M.Dancer

In fact Alberta's hostility towards the federal government is due to a large part by the feds continually pandering to Quebec and basically being politically ignored.

Your analysis of Quebec being a being 'a founding member' is Liberal history and discredits Britain and does not reflect the true political situation concerning the British win of Canada on 'The Plains of Abraham'.

What you say about Quebec having half the population of the Dominion simply isn't true. The only time Quebec's numbers were almost equal was when Lord Durham passed the Act of Union joining upper and lower Canada and which at that time Canada was not yet a Dominion.

Quebec initially was allowed concessions from Britain which included the right to their own language (not official), their Catholic religion and own civil law. Quebec's role regarding consular missions in foreign countries is limited.

Quebec is not in the position to shape it's future as it is a 'have not province' dependent on the federal government and other provinces in Canada concerning it's present viability as a functioning province.

It makes me laugh when you suggest in the event of Quebec separation Canada would continue dealing with Quebec. Their are a million issues that must be resolved before that would ever happen including animosity from other provinces that just might want to do the same thing if Quebec gets away with it.

It is a nightmare scenario.

What makes me laugh is your inability to comprehend what I wrote and insert your own narrow view. Har! there I laughed.

I don't know why you want to drag Alberta ..........

I suggest you bone up on ol' firewall Harper

Your analysis of Quebec being a being 'a founding member' is Liberal history and discredits Britain and does not reflect the true political situation concerning the British win of Canada on 'The Plains of Abraham'.

I'm not sure what "liberal history" is. I'm not sure if you know either, considering that the original provinces were Quebec, Ontario Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. You might also be unaware as to who the leading personages were. It was covered in High School.

What you say about Quebec having half the population of the Dominion simply isn't true

A province that at one time counted lmost half the population of the Dominion --M.Dancer

Population: 1861

Quebec 1,191,516

Ontaio 1,620,851

Nova Scotia 387,800

New Brunswick 285,594

So sue me for not being an accountant......and I'll sue you for putting words in my mouth.

It makes me laugh when you suggest in the event of Quebec separation Canada would continue dealing with Quebec. Their are a million issues that must be resolved before that would ever happen including animosity from other provinces that just might want to do the same thing if Quebec gets away with it.

This is where I laugh again. Obviously you have one of them new fangled computers that puts words in where there are none. Please revert to the original and show in my post where I said anything about seperation.

As to the rest about the plains of abraham yadda yadda yadda.....thge plain of abraham ws a battel fought between two forien powers and has nothing to do with either confederation or the evolution of provincial power in Canada.

[Leafless]

What makes me laugh is your inability to comprehend what I wrote and insert your own narrow view. Har! there I laughed.

I don't know why you want to drag Alberta ..........

I suggest you bone up on ol' firewall Harper

The only province in Canada that is firewalled is Quebec along with harbouring and applying discriminating racist language policies.

[Leafless]

Your analysis of Quebec being a being 'a founding member' is Liberal history and discredits Britain and does not reflect the true political situation concerning the British win of Canada on 'The Plains of Abraham'.

I'm not sure what "liberal history" is. I'm not sure if you know either, considering that the original provinces were Quebec, Ontario Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. You might also be unaware as to who the leading personages were. It was covered in High School.

Liberal history is rewriting history to remove the emphasis off of Britain as the paramount force that gave us our constitution and country rather than the Liberal way dictating that 'founding nations are responsible for Canada as a country'.

Yeah, we know how Canada was peacefully founded by natives,explorers, France, Britain, everyone has a piece of Canada.

This is the Liberal socialist way.

And look at the problems it is causing to-day!!!

[M.Dancer]

Have you considered buying shares of alcan to help you with that?

The phrase you are struggling with is historical revisionism .....and it seems that's what you are asking for. Unless of course you have some secret masonic documents that show the impetus for confederation came from Britain and not from here. I'm simply dying for the geocities url on that.......

I'm not sure what problems you speak of....get back to me when you can flesh them out logically.

[Leafless]

There is no political consensus among Quebeckers as there is none among the rest-of-Canadians with respect to politics and self-determination.

I disagree. Now while some on the extreme would want a full and complete divorce, by far most Quebecers want to stay as part of Canada, but like the 9 other premiers, want more control. Even within the PQ, the spectrum on what the goal is ranges from a new federalism to sovereignty association to the extreme....but for the average jean....a final divorce is not the goal.

Why don't we have a referendum with the ROC do verify if we want to keep Quebec as part of Canada since they are the ROOT CAUSE of political animosity in Canada regarding basic hate towards federalism.

[M.Dancer]

What makes me laugh is your inability to comprehend what I wrote and insert your own narrow view. Har! there I laughed.

I don't know why you want to drag Alberta ..........

I suggest you bone up on ol' firewall Harper

The only province in Canada that is firewalled is Quebec along with harbouring and applying discriminating racist language policies.

I take it then you don't know what you are talking about and prefer to go just with the usual anti quebec bullshit....

Here....next time don't bother coming unarmed to a battle of wits....

http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes2004/leadersp...r%20firewall%22

[M.Dancer]

Why don't we have a referendum with the ROC do verify if we want to keep Quebec as part of Canada since they are the ROOT CAUSE of political animosity in Canada regarding basic hate towards federalism.

Good idea.....why not start hitting the local malls begging for spare change to pay for it.

[Leafless]

Have you considered buying shares of alcan to help you with that?

The phrase you are struggling with is historical revisionism .....and it seems that's what you are asking for. Unless of course you have some secret masonic documents that show the impetus for confederation came from Britain and not from here. I'm simply dying for the geocities url on that.......

I'm not sure what problems you speak of....get back to me when you can flesh them out logically.

So your calling the Liberals 'historians' who rewrite history, historical revisionist, yeah sure.

What Britain gave us was the country CANADA and this resulted eventually after the 'Act of Union' failed and what Quebec wanted badly to protect it's interest was basically 'federalism' and this was achieved through confederation.

How times change for little Quebec who every once in a while throws it's separatist fits and referendums and basically wants to be republic and now wants back to federalism with neat little federal ties but with the power of a country.

Now that I know and realize that you are incapable of reading in between the lines we will be more explicit.

[Leafless]

Why don't we have a referendum with the ROC do verify if we want to keep Quebec as part of Canada since they are the ROOT CAUSE of political animosity in Canada regarding basic hate towards federalism.

Good idea.....why not start hitting the local malls begging for spare change to pay for it.

Any cost will be a bargain compared to the money spent supporting Quebec over years.

[jbg]

I'm not sure what "liberal history" is. I'm not sure if you know either, considering that the original provinces were Quebec, Ontario Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. You might also be unaware as to who the leading personages were. It was covered in High School.

****

As to the rest about the plains of abraham yadda yadda yadda.....thge plain of abraham ws a battel fought between two forien powers and has nothing to do with either confederation or the evolution of provincial power in Canada.

I doubt everyone covered the "leading personages" in the founding of Canada. Apparently, the Plains of Abraham were not even covered in high school there.

In April 2006 I went to a thoroughly enjoyable Great Big Sea concert in New York City. I met some high school teachers from Peterborough, Ontario who did not know who Montcalm and Wolfe were, and/or what happened on the Plains of Abraham.

No wonder you don't realize that Canada's language question was/should have been considered settled there.

[M.Dancer]

So your calling the Liberals 'historians' who rewrite history, historical revisionist, yeah sure.

There goes your reading comprehension again...I'm calling you a historical revionist...but hysterical revisionist would probably be more accurate.

[M.Dancer]

No wonder you don't realize that Canada's language question was/should have been considered settled there.

Canada has a language question?

Que la question? Vous voulez la réponse maintenant ?

You don't seriously think that Quebec's desire for more power is about language do you? Then explain Alberta's desire or Newfoundland's.......

[Leafless]

So your calling the Liberals 'historians' who rewrite history, historical revisionist, yeah sure.

There goes your reading comprehension again...I'm calling you a historical revionist...but hysterical revisionist would probably be more accurate.

Where have I revised history concerning the history of Canada?

Perhaps you can produce a link that describes how France conquered and won Canada.

Quebecers are only a group of people left over from when French elites retreated back to France and left these people with virtually NO RIGHTS or entitlement to the land other then what Britain gave Quebec in the form of the 'Quebec Act'.

[M.Dancer]

So your calling the Liberals 'historians' who rewrite history, historical revisionist, yeah sure.

There goes your reading comprehension again...I'm calling you a historical revionist...but hysterical revisionist would probably be more accurate.

Where have I revised history concerning the history of Canada?

Perhaps you can produce a link that describes how France conquered and won Canada.

Quebecers are only a group of people left over from when French elites retreated back to France and left these people with virtually NO RIGHTS or entitlement to the land other then what Britain gave Quebec in the form of the 'Quebec Act'.

I'll say it again because today is BKTIs day...

18th century politics has no place in 21st century canada.

[Leafless]

So your calling the Liberals 'historians' who rewrite history, historical revisionist, yeah sure.

There goes your reading comprehension again...I'm calling you a historical revionist...but hysterical revisionist would probably be more accurate.

Where have I revised history concerning the history of Canada?

Perhaps you can produce a link that describes how France conquered and won Canada.

Quebecers are only a group of people left over from when French elites retreated back to France and left these people with virtually NO RIGHTS or entitlement to the land other then what Britain gave Quebec in the form of the 'Quebec Act'.

I'll say it again because today is BKTIs day...

18th century politics has no place in 21st century canada.

Your opinion is unsubstantiated and was never formally challenged.

That day will come.

[geoffrey]

Good idea.....why not start hitting the local malls begging for spare change to pay for it.

Any cost will be a bargain compared to the money spent supporting Quebec over years.

We'd be better off booting the Maritimes. I'd vote for that, but all the Newfie exports would still have to work in Alberta...

[jbg]

I'll say it again because today is BKTIs day...

18th century politics has no place in 21st century canada.

But majority rule does. And French sovereignty, as well as language issues, were settled in the Quebec Act, on the Plains of Abraham and at the end of Louis Riel's noose.

[Charles Anthony]

But majority rule does.

Really?? How so?

What we have in Canada is a multitude of Canadians spinning toy steering wheels -- the kind that you attach to children car seats to give them the illusion that they are driving.

And French sovereignty, as well as language issues, were settled in the Quebec Act, on the Plains of Abraham and at the end of Louis Riel's noose.

Are you so confident that those issues can not be re-opened in the same way?

[M.Dancer]

But majority rule does.

Really?? How so?

What we have in Canada is a multitude of Canadians spinning toy steering wheels -- the kind that you attach to children car seats to give them the illusion that they are driving.

And French sovereignty, as well as language issues, were settled in the Quebec Act, on the Plains of Abraham and at the end of Louis Riel's noose.

Are you so confident that those issues can not be re-opened in the same way?

I am amazed to learn that Riel was a quebecer.....Or that their is some question about the sovereignty of France......

[Leafless]

But majority rule does.

Really?? How so?

What we have in Canada is a multitude of Canadians spinning toy steering wheels -- the kind that you attach to children car seats to give them the illusion that they are driving.

I agree to a point, majority demands do not rule the land.

But then again in Canada this really depends who is steering the government.

Normally in a democracy governments do listen to majority concerns important to it's citizens.

[jbg]

But majority rule does.

Really?? How so?

What we have in Canada is a multitude of Canadians spinning toy steering wheels -- the kind that you attach to children car seats to give them the illusion that they are driving.

And French sovereignty, as well as language issues, were settled in the Quebec Act, on the Plains of Abraham and at the end of Louis Riel's noose.

Are you so confident that those issues can not be re-opened in the same way?

I am amazed to learn that Riel was a quebecer.....Or that their is some question about the sovereignty of France......

Oops. Typo. You know and I know I meant Quebec sovereignty, not French sovereignty.

[M.Dancer]

But majority rule does.

Really?? How so?

What we have in Canada is a multitude of Canadians spinning toy steering wheels -- the kind that you attach to children car seats to give them the illusion that they are driving.

And French sovereignty, as well as language issues, were settled in the Quebec Act, on the Plains of Abraham and at the end of Louis Riel's noose.

Are you so confident that those issues can not be re-opened in the same way?

I am amazed to learn that Riel was a quebecer.....Or that their is some question about the sovereignty of France......

Oops. Typo. You know and I know I meant Quebec sovereignty, not French sovereignty.

No I haven't a clue what you mean or meant.

[jbg]

But majority rule does.

Really?? How so?

What we have in Canada is a multitude of Canadians spinning toy steering wheels -- the kind that you attach to children car seats to give them the illusion that they are driving.

And French sovereignty, as well as language issues, were settled in the Quebec Act, on the Plains of Abraham and at the end of Louis Riel's noose.

Are you so confident that those issues can not be re-opened in the same way?

I am amazed to learn that Riel was a quebecer.....Or that their is some question about the sovereignty of France......

Oops. Typo. You know and I know I meant Quebec sovereignty, not French sovereignty.

No I haven't a clue what you mean or meant.

That Canada's place in the Anglosphere is long settled.