News   Jan 08, 2025
50 Scollard Tops Off as Cladding and Glazing Installation Continues
 633     0 
News   Jan 08, 2025
Quintet of High-Rises Proposed on Kingston Road in Pickering
 1.1K     1 
News   Jan 08, 2025
News Roundup for January 8, 2025
 540     1 

Decima: poll suggests Conservative breakthrough

^I think you raise some good questions about the future of Canada. Still, the idea of losing open-minded people in the face of the encroaching powers of empire is sad. You will experience this much more while in Russia, though. If you care to, it would be interesting to hear your impressions of what goes on there.

Your are gonna really, really love the Netherlands after Moscow.
 
You will experience this much more while in Russia, though. If you care to, it would be interesting to hear your impressions of what goes on there.
Click to expand...

Id be glad to offer my thoughts. Part of the reason I decided to go to Moscow was too experience, study, and understand Russia first hand. It will no doubt be an eye opening experience.
 
Bizorky: "I voted for them. I didn't vote for a sponsorship scandal, by the way, I voted for my local MP. I also liked elements of the Liberal platform, elements that they had acted on with respect to cities, for example. Was it all perfect? Not by any stretch. Nor will things be perfect for the Conservatives.

^The local MP you love so much is no doubt whipped into towing the party line at all costs!! My approach is different. On principle I could not bring myself to vote for a party that has robbed the Canadian people, thereby essentially becoming abusive of its power and dismissive of its constituents. This is a stand of principle not of policy. Just what kind of message would it have sent to the liberals had they won another majority???

Bizorky: "You spend more than half your post promoting the Conservatives by lambasting the Liberals. Exactly what stands of the Conservatives do you find so appealing so far?"

^Softwood lumber impressed me. It only took a month or so to achieve what the liberals could not achieve in years. This is only one example but it suffices in that it pretty much underlines the inaction of the liberals who were too busy lining their own pockets on their watch.

I've always had concerns about the social agenda of the conservatives which is why I would not vote for them, but that doesn't mean I cannot appreciate how they are dealing with other files. In the meantime, like many moderate Canadians who do not consider themselves either radical social or radical right wing, I will watch both the Conservatives and the Liberals closely over the next year or so to figure out where best to place my vote.
 
Afransen: I guess you're just so used to liberals not standing for anything or not doing anything that it is actually astonishing to you that a party should actually *work* with their mandate. Don't worry, this is a democracy and you will have the ability to judge if you like or do not like the work the conservatives have done. So will the rest of the country for that matter. Time will tell.
 
If we have a democracy, why is Harper afraid to bring these issues to be debated in Parliament rather than making the decisions unilaterally or making these issues of confidence? He is acting arrogantly, by abrogating a major international treaty which most Canadian support while he has the most tenuous of mandates. I can't fathom why you approve of him making this move. Canadians are generally pretty behind the notion that we need to reduce our GHG emissions, and Harper is dedicated to a "do-nothing" course of action...
 
Softwood lumber impressed me. It only took a month or so to achieve what the liberals could not achieve in years. This is only one example but it suffices in that it pretty much underlines the inaction of the liberals who were too busy lining their own pockets on their watch.
Click to expand...

You are politically niave to think that the Conservatives achieved this by themselves in one month. The challenge to the American actions were all carried out by the previous government, and the ground work for all subsequent negotiations were all in place long before the Conservatives got into power. As for the deal that so impressed you, we were ripped off to the tune of a billion dollars. Maybe that's why the Liberals were in no hurray to sign off.
 
I agree. Harper got a deal no better than the deal the Liberals would have gotten had they chosen to buy off the Americans (by essentially donating a billion dollars to US lumber producers). I was more in favour of fighting this until the US was bound to concede (believe it or not, but such a verdict wasn't far off). Capitulating merely encourages this sort of thing to occur in different industries, perhaps steel, or wheat, etc. We should have gotten a better deal, IMO.

Same goes for border security. Harper rolled over in the face of unreasonable and unwarranted new security requirements... measures that were essentially only put in place in order to placate the Mexican government.
 
Afransan: "If we have a democracy, why is Harper afraid to bring these issues to be debated in Parliament rather than making the decisions unilaterally or making these issues of confidence? He is acting arrogantly, by abrogating a major international treaty which most Canadian support while he has the most tenuous of mandates. I can't fathom why you approve of him making this move. Canadians are generally pretty behind the notion that we need to reduce our GHG emissions, and Harper is dedicated to a "do-nothing" course of action..."

^It's called 'governing'. The Conservatives are doing it boldly, in a minority governing position no less! How refreshing. Didn't Harper bring the issue of Afghanistan to the house? Didn't the Conservative budget pass the house?? The House does judge, and in time the electorate will judge. In the meantime if you don't agree with policies so be it, but try to avoid the histrionics: he's not undermining democracy or ruling without a mandate, he's not being arrogant and 'abregating' the will of Canadians. He's the Prime Minister!!! Come on, a little perspective here!


Bizorky: "You are politically niave to think that the Conservatives achieved this by themselves in one month. The challenge to the American actions were all carried out by the previous government, and the ground work for all subsequent negotiations were all in place long before the Conservatives got into power. As for the deal that so impressed you, we were ripped off to the tune of a billion dollars. Maybe that's why the Liberals were in no hurray to sign off.

^Please, the Americans wouldn't even talk to the Liberals! Harper reached a deal that was supported by the provinces and the Canadian lumber industry. Sorry if that is not impressive enough for you. He reached a deal because he understands that all negotiation includes compromise, and any moron can tell you that it's better to walk away with a solid $4 billion in the hand than hold out for $5 billion that will never come. Still, this is liberal logic isn't it? This is the sort of liberal arrogance and ineptitude that thinks you can sit at a table and make nothing but demands yet somehow walk away with a deal. In my experience that is not the way the world works, and this is not rocket science we're talking here. So yes indeed, mark up a triumph for the Conservatives in only a few months of governance, and an unmitigated failure for the Liberals after years of political office.
 
tudararms:

In the meantime if you don't agree with policies so be it, but try to avoid the histrionics: he's not undermining democracy or ruling without a mandate, he's not being arrogant and 'abregating' the will of Canadians. He's the Prime Minister!!! Come on, a little perspective here!
Click to expand...

Hmm, interestingly I recall certain talks on the part of then opposition Conservatives on how the Liberals were being "arrogant" in the minority government. Perspective, it seems, does change depends on one's position.

^Please, the Americans wouldn't even talk to the Liberals! Harper reached a deal that was supported by the provinces and the Canadian lumber industry. Sorry if that is not impressive enough for you. He reached a deal because he understands that all negotiation includes compromise, and any moron can tell you that it's better to walk away with a solid $4 billion in the hand than hold out for $5 billion that will never come. Still, this is liberal logic isn't it? This is the sort of liberal arrogance and ineptitude that thinks you can sit at a table and make nothing but demands yet somehow walk away with a deal. In my experience that is not the way the world works, and this is not rocket science we're talking here. So yes indeed, mark up a triumph for the Conservatives in only a few months of governance, and an unmitigated failure for the Liberals after years of political office.
Click to expand...

I believe there are ample reports that a deal was all but finalized during the latter days of the Liberal government, with David Emerson sitting on the file for "whatever" reasons. Interestingly, the said individual acrossed the floor and mirabile dictu, a deal is made.

As to the issue of "liberal arrogance", I thought the Conservatives believes in the letter of the law and the importance of honouring agreements (certainly, it is so when applied at an individual level). Naive as that may be from an IR perspective, give me a good reason why we should capitulate on this field, while remain "steadfast" in others, sugar-coating it as "bravery" and "committed"?

AoD
 
"It's called 'governing'. The Conservatives are doing it boldly, in a minority governing position no less!"

Exactly the problem. Harper is abusing his power as an autocrat in the same way Chretien did, only Harper has no majority! He has an extremely weak minority.

"How refreshing. Didn't Harper bring the issue of Afghanistan to the house?"

He told the House it didn't matter what they decided--he would extend the mission. The vote was moot.

"Didn't the Conservative budget pass the house??"

Only for fear of an election. If it would not have triggered an election, there would be no hope of that budget passing.

"The House does judge, and in time the electorate will judge. In the meantime if you don't agree with policies so be it, but try to avoid the histrionics: he's not undermining democracy or ruling without a mandate,"

He has a tiny mandate. He barely has 40% of the house, and no coalition, yet is circumventing the house in terms of making decisions such as the continued existence of the gun registry, or his decision to abandon Kyoto. That latter would never pass if put to a vote in the House of Commons.

"he's not being arrogant"

If you believe that, I can only conclude that you are a Harper bootlicker or extremely naive.

"'abregating' the will of Canadians. He's the Prime Minister!!!"

Exactly--he's not the president. He should not abuse his unchecked power as if he had a strong mandate. He does not!
 
Please, the Americans wouldn't even talk to the Liberals! Harper reached a deal that was supported by the provinces and the Canadian lumber industry. Sorry if that is not impressive enough for you. He reached a deal because he understands that all negotiation includes compromise, and any moron can tell you that it's better to walk away with a solid $4 billion in the hand than hold out for $5 billion that will never come. Still, this is liberal logic isn't it? This is the sort of liberal arrogance and ineptitude that thinks you can sit at a table and make nothing but demands yet somehow walk away with a deal.
Click to expand...

The Americans wouldn't even talk to the Liberals? Sorry, but that is not true. I know a couple of people who work in government related to this issue and from what they tell me, the problem lay entirely in the United States. The Americans could not get their act together, and could not agree on a whole host of issues. Outside of government, he biggest opposition to the deal came from American home builders. The greatest support was from powerful wood lot owners in politically sensitive states. Funny how American lumber companies in Canada did not find the deal too appealing either.

Otherwise, there was plenty of talk between the previous government and the US government. I think you are being willfully naive to the complexity of this issue as it exists in the United States.

As for any moron telling me something, let me ask you something. Suppose I rob you of $100. You call the police, and the police catch me, find me in the wrong and tell me to pay you back $80. Do you take it? Who would the moron be?
 
Bizorky: "As for any moron telling me something, let me ask you something. Suppose I rob you of $100. You call the police, and the police catch me, find me in the wrong and tell me to pay you back $80. Do you take it? Who would the moron be?"

^This is not an accurate analogy of the situation. Do you really believe that Canada is 100% right and the U.S. is 100% wrong? Even if you do, you can be right all you want but not get anywhere...

When both sides of a negotiation dig their heels in and refuse to budge on their belief of being 100% right you are left with stalemate which doesn't benefit anybody! Here both sides reached a workable compromise to move onwards that was accepted by the provinces and the Canadian and U.S. lumber industries. Liberal sour grapes notwithstanding, this is the essence of negotiation.


Bizorky: "Otherwise, there was plenty of talk between the previous government and the US government. I think you are being willfully naive to the complexity of this issue as it exists in the United States."

^Why don't you write an essay on this to educate all of us naive and uninformed ones, and the liberals can conduct endless further inquiries and talks, creating lots of bureaucratic positions for years to come, and proving to world at all cost that Canada is right, damn it! In the meantime we'll appreciate watching the Conservatives move on to actually resolving other issues the Liberals didn't.


Afransen: "Exactly the problem. Harper is abusing his power as an autocrat in the same way Chretien did, only Harper has no majority! He has an extremely weak minority."

^Are you suggesting that a minority government has no mandate to govern? Are you suggesting that Canada's government should only function and act in a majority situation?? A minority government is far more democratic than a majority dictatorship ever could be. Believe it or not we have actually had liberal minority governments too.

Afransen: "If you believe that, I can only conclude that you are a Harper bootlicker or extremely naive."

^Is this the best you can come up with in a political debate?? So let me get this straight, if you support the Liberals you're okay, if you support the conservatives you're a naive 'bootlicker'? Hmmmm, interesting logic. Nice to see you're accepting of other points of view!

Nevertheless, to put matters straight here there are plenty of things I don't like about the Conservatives: I am opposed to their treatment of the media and to the general direction that this is taking, and I would be opposed to any position or motion that is against any minority in this country and believe this would be a worthy issue to bring down this government were it to do so. To me, unlike softwood lumber, certain things like basic human rights and equality are not up for negotiation.

AoD: "Hmm, interestingly I recall certain talks on the part of then opposition Conservatives on how the Liberals were being "arrogant" in the minority government. Perspective, it seems, does change depends on one's position."

^Are you attributing this hypocrisy to me?

The Liberals are arrogant whether in a minority or majority position. What did Gomery call it? Ah yes, "A culture of entitlement". Perfect.
 
Why don't you write an essay on this to educate all of us naive and uninformed ones, and the liberals can conduct endless further inquiries and talks, creating lots of bureaucratic positions for years to come, and proving to world at all cost that Canada is right, damn it! In the meantime we'll appreciate watching the Conservatives move on to actually resolving other issues the Liberals didn't.
Click to expand...

Why don't you excuse yourself from the company of others and take the responsibility to inform yourself.

Nice to see you so willing to sell out to the American interests in this issue.

So enjoy your partisanship. That's your right. But don't be so surprised if others have views that differ from your own; that's politics.

Oh, and as a note, never defend actions that are yet to be done. This has a nasty way of biting you back at a later date. That's the political lesson of the day. No essay required.

This is not an accurate analogy of the situation. Do you really believe that Canada is 100% right and the U.S. is 100% wrong? Even if you do, you can be right all you want but not get anywhere...
Click to expand...

If the Americans gave back four-fifths of the tariffs, does that mean they admit to being 80% wrong? Would that mean that the Canadian position was four-fifths correct? How does that sound to you?
 
You guys are wasting your time and energy defending the Conservatives and Liberals... neither deserves defending... one is just as crooked as the other.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top