News   Apr 25, 2024
 363     0 
News   Apr 25, 2024
 1.1K     4 
News   Apr 25, 2024
 1.1K     0 

Ignatieff is useless

2006 was an interesting election, the Conservatives campaigned on an anti-corruption platform, but no one knew they themselves were committing 10x more serious fraud with the In and Out scheme as that very election was going on. I find it bitterly ironic that the Conservative party was using illegal, laundered money to fund the very ads they ran that anti-corruption campaign theme on.
That's a very good point. I think a lot of people have forgotten the whole timing of it. The exact timing hadn't dawned on me.

Normally when we see these issues start to arise it's been after the party has been in power for a long time, and become complacent, etc. In the Tories case, we see very serious corruption at a time they aren't even in power, and are fighting the Liberals on corruption issues.

I'm sure in time we'll see evidence arise directly connecting Stephen Harper to these crimes, rather than just his top campaign managers. The same way we've now since seen evidence that former Tory Prime-Minister Mulroney took payments of cash in brown envelopes while still in government.
 
Thanks, it is time people pick up on this theme. It is the simple, hard truth that the Harper Government can't deny. They were so power hungry that they started dirty tricks before they even got in office, and the kind of dirty tricks they used are above and beyond anything seen before in terms of money laundering for campaign funds.

Liberals were in power for years before sponsorship became an issue, and again they opened up that scandal to a public inquiry. And again, that scandal wasn't based on election fraud - the cradle of the democratic process - it was a quid pro quo deal where Liberals gave government money to Liberal friendly ad companies that were helping out the Quebec nationalism issue. In other words, typical government scandal that, while wrong, isn't democratically devastating or hurting the very core of the system. There is a holistically different method to how the Conservatives and the Liberals and the NDP operate, the Conservatives are the only modern Canadian party that have adopted this no-holds-barred, 24/7 campaign style that relies on questionable money and sources for those funds. Liberals aren't perfect, no party is, but the Conservative government has a lot of dirt on it's hands, not to mention the entirely appalling hypocrisy. It is beyond hypocritical what they did, it is indeed downright pathetic and desperate.
 
Last edited:
A pretty lame joke...

Here's the reality.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/can...4/11/cv-election-ag-report-reaction-1244.html

Tories under fire over leaked G8 report

A leaked draft report on G8/G20 summit spending that alleges the Conservative government lavished millions on a prominent cabinet member's riding and "misled" Parliament has put Stephen Harper's campaign on the defensive a day before the first leaders' debate.


This scandal has pushed the Conservatives above and beyond anyone else on the corruption front.
 
Bull shite. Did you get this info from Stephen Harpers facebook page? This is 2011, go ask any Liberal if they would vote for the Constervaites over the NDP they would laugh and say not a chance in hell. i'm a Liberal and have no problems with a coalition with the NDP.

See afransen's post above. Like I said. Card-carrying Liberals won't go Conservative. However, the vast, vast majority of voters are centrists who often switch sides. They might have tendencies to one side or the other. But in no way is their vote guaranteed. Any party that moves too far out of reach of the centre will be doomed. Why do you think the merged right is stuck in minority mode when their pre-merger vote should have made them at least competitive for a majority? And you don't think this would happen to a far more leftist Liberal-dipper merged party?
 
The Liberal party is extremely diverse. There are obviously some "blue Liberals" in the party, but I think they are a relatively tiny group (and usually are sellouts, like Rocco Rossi who appears to be an opportunist rather than a principled politician). Most Liberals I know are much like you, prefer the Liberals by far, but are much closer to the NDP than the Conservatives. There is an obvious symbiotic relationship between the Liberals and NDP. Or maybe it is a love/hate relationship. The reforms of the 1960's that built so much of Canadian identity was a coalition working with the Liberals, NDP, and Socreds.

Once again you mistake card-carrying Liberals for people who vote Liberal. There are big differences between the two.
 
Just watching the debate, Ignatieff uses hand gestures to illustrate his points. He has my vote:p
 
The debate was most interesting, I think Ignatieff asserted the Liberal viewpoint well. It was certainly on point, direct, and substantive. Harper seems to have stuck to the following: state that elections are essentially unnecessary, that nothing said against him was true, and to trust him with a majority government. Pause, rewind, repeat...Only time will tell how well he performed.
 
Interesting, I thought it was dull and predictable with them all sticking to their talking points. Duceppe got a couple of good jabs in -- he can be more assertive, because he has nothing to lose. I also thought Jack got a good dig in at Iggy for his poor attendance record. None of them impressed me overall, however.
 
The debate was most interesting, I think Ignatieff asserted the Liberal viewpoint well.
I disagree. Iggy mentioned nothing about any Liberal plans and proposed policies should they form the government, and instead just attacked Harper. This was Iggy's chance to tell the nation what a Liberal government would be like, and he didn't seize the opportunity. Again, I would say that Ignatieff failed to assert the Liberal viewpoint entirely.
 
I disagree. Iggy mentioned nothing about any Liberal plans and proposed policies should they form the government, and instead just attacked Harper. This was Iggy's chance to tell the nation what a Liberal government would be like, and he didn't seize the opportunity. Again, I would say that Ignatieff failed to assert the Liberal viewpoint entirely.

Well it is up to Canadians to do homework and listen to the substance. Each individual can choose on May 2nd. Iggy did talk about plans, he went over the education passport, his plans to balance the budget by rolling back tax cuts for corporations to a competitive 18%, and then focused on how Harper has disrespected democratic principles. I think he was on message. I walked around and talked to Canadians while canvassing this past week and I'm happy to have heard that people that didn't vote last time are coming out to vote this time. I heard from people that voted Liberal before, but are considering coming out again now that Iggy is leader. This may be a surprise election, maybe not... We shall see.

To a larger argument, I find it interesting how cynicism plays a big role in politics. The system isn't that bad, these governments have delivered results. I don't always agree with how the Harper government operates, but it has delivered for Conservative principles. I disagree with Harper's budgets, but he did lower corporate taxes from above 20% to the coming 15% bracket. He did cut funding for child care. He did stand up against same sex marriage, lost that battle, then moved on. Harper has been responsible for his principles. His immigration ministers Jason Kenney and Diane Finley both changed immigration and reduced skilled worker classes, limited the system, and focused on temporary foreign workers instead of permanent immigration classes... I disagree with them and I want him gone.

But this cynicism that Liberals haven't done anything is beyond annoying.

Liberal accomplishment in the past few years:

*Balanced the budget for nearly a decade after inheriting the worst recession in modern history from the Mulroney/Campbell Tories
*Created a health accord after balancing the budget in 2004/06 under a minority government to secure funding and continue to make the system sustainable well into the future
*Advanced human rights by promoting same sex marriage, creating the largest land jurisdiction in the world to observe this generation's premiere civil rights issue
*Led Canada successfully through the Quebec separatism movement in 1995, basically making the issue null and void, escalating to the 2006 recognition of Quebec as a nation within Canada
*Liberals flat out refused during the 1990's to de-regulate banks, under huge pressure from private enterprise and lobby interests, using the booming US market of that day as the example/excuse, this has led to Canada having a sound housing market with proper mortgage regulation and therefore Canada didn't invest and make the same mistake that the US market did, as well as many European markets that invested into the US boondoggle. The Liberals single handedly are more responsible for Canada's more sound housing policy that allowed the nation to enter the worldwide Great Recession with the least problems, and exit that same Recession more quickly and with the best results. Harper had nothing to do with it. Harper's budgets are a mish-mash of programs that hand out money to his friends and bow down to NDP and Liberal tendencies just to get it passed.

The list of Liberal accomplishment is long, and it can go on and on. Say what you will about sponsorship, a program that spent $100 million, of which only a portion was mismanaged. The Liberals overall have delivered real results.

The choice Canada has is between "The Harper Government" or a good Liberal government. If people want to waste a vote on Elizabeth May or Jack Layton (a person I personally think is respectable) then that's up to the individual voter. If soft Conservatives who left the Liberals want to continue supporting a government that has demonstrated it is into cuts for the wealthy, is open to privatizing health care, is open to huge corruption.. That is the individual choice.

IMO I think the Liberal government can deliver. The NDP platform is basically the Liberal platform repackaged and slightly changed... It won't form a government, it won't deliver. Liberals can deliver.

Liberals are interested in creating equality of opportunity, not equality of the end result. It is a party that cares deeply about human rights and expanding rights. Liberals have a platform that in every way focuses on enhancing that equality of opportunity, and it is a party that understands a strong free market that is regulated is the answer, not some party that expects government to go around wiping everyone's tush. A good government is the Liberal government, and that is what I'm hoping for. You can only be so cynical, the Liberals have delivered for Canada in the past.

It is time for Canada to make it's choice. I'll observe and keep my fingers crossed for what I want. All the whining and bitching and moaning I hear on Urban Toronto isn't what I heard when I was in the streets of Ontario this past weekend, I found a positive, friendly, proud Canada. I even ran into Conservatives, who I may disagree with, but I respectfully disagreed with. I could care less how cynical people can be, cynicism doesn't build or do anything.
 
Last edited:
I can't vote for the Liberals. Bob Rae is my local candidate and voting him out of the premier's office was one of my key motivators for obtaining Canadian citizenship back in the 1990s. Problem with the Liberals is that you don't know what you're going to get, too much flip flopping. At least with the Dippers and Cons you know what you're going to get. The lack of predictability will hurt the Liberal's chances.
 

Back
Top