Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Pierre the Great

The Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

Yup I agree completely (lol just can't stay away for a day (although I'm getting work done on a break))

in the westminster system you need two strong parties, 1 in opposition and 1 in government. Its the only way for some kind of balance.

Same with America's system. When one party controls everything corruption takes place.

If one party isn't strong enough you end up like Howard in Australia.

Most boring person on the planet, but yet he's been in power for ages why? because the labour party there is weak.

Sweden's going through the same thing right now with the Moderates in charge over the Social Dems. Will the Social Dems be back? oh of course Sweden likes social democrats always has always will. Will the Liberal party be back in Canada? yeah.

And so on.

One party cannot rule forever.

The problem with Bush is that he has absolutely no class. Part of that has to do with Karl Rove. Rove's political agenda is slash and burn. Rove is the sole person responsible for this hatred and polarization of this country.

Thats the problem I see with the Conservative Party in Canada. They've got this Rove type mentality that is not good for the country.

All parties do it, I'm not denying that but continually acting like your in election mode attacking attacking and attacking the opposition or government or whomever does not help democracy it only hurts.

I respect conservatives. I understand in what they believe in. But I loose respect for anyone or any party that wants to divide the people instead of uniting them.

Its like church politics. I got into it and it burned me up. I said why are we bickering about silly things calling each other names and saying your going to hell and such when the main purpose of religion and church is to celebrate God. Churches don't do that anymore. Instead they go on about how the other people have it wrong and they've got it right. This I'm better then you syndrome is poison.

Politics has become that. I'm better then you blah blah blah. Then you start to wonder if we're part of the same country or not. The purpose of politics is to represent the people and unite countries not to divide and seperate.

Need any more proof of polarization just look at Alberta vs. the rest of the country. Nobody likes Alberta politicians because they're preceived as putting Alberta's interests first. Alberta doesn't like the rest of canada politicians because they see them as anti alberta.

And don't use the excuse of the NEP. Last time I checked Alberta was in Canada. And the NEP was soo long ago. They're acting like Washington does with Castro. They still think its 1960.

Just let it go.

Anyway thats politics for yeah I guess. Back to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup I agree completely (lol just can't stay away for a day (although I'm getting work done on a break))

in the westminster system you need two strong parties, 1 in opposition and 1 in government. Its the only way for some kind of balance.

Same with America's system. When one party controls everything corruption takes place.

If one party isn't strong enough you end up like Howard in Australia.

Most boring person on the planet, but yet he's been in power for ages why? because the labour party there is weak.

Sweden's going through the same thing right now with the Moderates in charge over the Social Dems. Will the Social Dems be back? oh of course Sweden likes social democrats always has always will. Will the Liberal party be back in Canada? yeah.

And so on.

One party cannot rule forever.

The problem with Bush is that he has absolutely no class. Part of that has to do with Karl Rove. Rove's political agenda is slash and burn. Rove is the sole person responsible for this hatred and polarization of this country.

Thats the problem I see with the Conservative Party in Canada. They've got this Rove type mentality that is not good for the country.

All parties do it, I'm not denying that but continually acting like your in election mode attacking attacking and attacking the opposition or government or whomever does not help democracy it only hurts.

I respect conservatives. I understand in what they believe in. But I loose respect for anyone or any party that wants to divide the people instead of uniting them.

Its like church politics. I got into it and it burned me up. I said why are we bickering about silly things calling each other names and saying your going to hell and such when the main purpose of religion and church is to celebrate God. Churches don't do that anymore. Instead they go on about how the other people have it wrong and they've got it right. This I'm better then you syndrome is poison.

Politics has become that. I'm better then you blah blah blah. Then you start to wonder if we're part of the same country or not. The purpose of politics is to represent the people and unite countries not to divide and seperate.

Need any more proof of polarization just look at Alberta vs. the rest of the country. Nobody likes Alberta politicians because they're preceived as putting Alberta's interests first. Alberta doesn't like the rest of canada politicians because they see them as anti alberta.

And don't use the excuse of the NEP. Last time I checked Alberta was in Canada. And the NEP was soo long ago. They're acting like Washington does with Castro. They still think its 1960.

Just let it go.

Anyway thats politics for yeah I guess. Back to work.

Nice write

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile in the United States the Democrats are attempting to help pay off Chinese banks to pay for Bush's tax cuts.

CNN-Democrats to quickly target oil industry tax breaks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

America is very blue at the moment ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Senior Democrat calls for the renew of the military draft:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061119/pl_nm/...litics_draft_dc

I'd support it because where I come from the people supporting the war are the rich folk but when I ask the idiots to sign up for it they don't.

Plus it would give me personally a quicker way of getting to Canada. Although the Liberals would have to be in charge because I highly doubt Harper would do what Trudeau did back in the early 70's basically saying 'Come to Canada'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Senior Democrat calls for the renew of the military draft:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061119/pl_nm/...litics_draft_dc

I'd support it because where I come from the people supporting the war are the rich folk but when I ask the idiots to sign up for it they don't.

Plus it would give me personally a quicker way of getting to Canada. Although the Liberals would have to be in charge because I highly doubt Harper would do what Trudeau did back in the early 70's basically saying 'Come to Canada'.

This is the same guy who proposed a draft bill a couple years ago and it was voted down 402-2. The draft is not coming back unless an all out WWIII breaks out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im a dual citzen, so when the draft comes along.... I moving to Canada :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Senior Democrat calls for the renew of the military draft:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061119/pl_nm/...litics_draft_dc

I'd support it because where I come from the people supporting the war are the rich folk but when I ask the idiots to sign up for it they don't.

Plus it would give me personally a quicker way of getting to Canada. Although the Liberals would have to be in charge because I highly doubt Harper would do what Trudeau did back in the early 70's basically saying 'Come to Canada'.

Great idea this draft thing. If you want to go to war, you should be willing to spill your own blood for the cause. Wish they had re-instated this law before Iraq ... then I'm sure it would have been a lot more unpopular, and Bush would have lost his presidency. Always amazes me how people don't mind when other people lose their lives. Out of site, I guess, is out of mind!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NDP's proposed changes to the 'clean air act'

The NDP-proposed amendments include the following:

* To rename the act the Healthy Air and Climate Act, indicating that Kyoto Protocol targets, which were absent from the original bill, would become a key priority of the revised act;

* To set targets that Canada must meet, such as the Kyoto Protocol 2008 to 2012 targets, an 80 per cent reduction in emissions below 1990 levels, by 2050;

* To set interim targets at five year intervals between 2015 and 2050;

* To give new authority to the environment minister that would allow him or her to designate significant areas under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act;

* And a "just-transition fund" to help the automobile move from voluntary to mandatory targets.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

The article said that all three opposition parties would vote against the 'clean air act'.

Now help me out on this. Layton's idea is a private members bill. Now what if the three main opposition parties vote for this legislation. Since Harper's in a minority government he couldn't kill the bill.

What I'm saying is would the bill pass and become law? Even though the 'government' is not for it?

Someone help me on this one. Not familiar with the Westminster Parliamentary System as well as I should be.

But then if something like that would pass wouldn't that be considered a confidence vote and trigger an election?

From what I see in the parliamentary system its all or nothing. And if something like this could pass against the governments wishes to me that basically means the government is not fit to run the country thereby forcing an election.

Can someone give me some clarification on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I'm saying is would the bill pass and become law? Even though the 'government' is not for it?

Someone help me on this one. Not familiar with the Westminster Parliamentary System as well as I should be.

But then if something like that would pass wouldn't that be considered a confidence vote and trigger an election?

If Parliament passes the bill, it becomes law, even if it's without Conservative support.

I don't think the passing of a private member's bill would have the consequences of a confidence vote. If a minority government tries to pass a bill and fails, it's generally only considered a non-confidence vote if it's a money bill (e.g. the budget), or if they declare it to be a confidence vote beforehand themselves. I don't think this is a money bill per se (although undoubtedly there are budget implications), and a private member's bill passing wouldn't have the same effect as a government bill failing to pass. (That's constitutionally speaking. Practically speaking, the Conservatives may decide that this issue is of such importance - and/or they would hate the idea of their environmental policy being hijacked - that they would decide to dissolve Parliament and call an election.)

But then, I'm not a constitutional expert, and we haven't had much minority government experience until recently, so I could be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's one of those issues that gets me going. This song is our 2nd national Anthem but is to "non-multicultural" and too "Colonial British" for it to be accepted as our 2nd anthem.

So, here are the lyrics to Maple Leaf Forever written in 1867:

In Days of yore,

From Britain's shore

Wolfe the dauntless hero came

And planted firm Britannia's flag

On Canada's fair domain.

Here may it wave,

Our boast, our pride

And joined in love together,

The thistle, shamrock, rose entwined,

The Maple Leaf Forever.

[CHORUS]

The Maple Leaf

Our Emblem Dear,

The Maple Leaf Forever.

God save our Queen and heaven bless,

The Maple Leaf Forever.

At Queenston Heights and Lundy's Lane

Our brave fathers side by side

For freedom's home and loved ones dear,

Firmly stood and nobly died.

And so their rights which they maintained,

We swear to yeild them never.

Our watchword ever more shall be

The Maple Leaf Forever

[CHORUS]

Our fair Dominion now extends

From Cape Race to Nootka Sound

May peace forever be our lot

And plenty a store abound

And may those ties of love be ours

Which discord cannot sever

And flourish green for freedom's home

The Maple Leaf Forever

SHAME ON OUR HISTORY - IT'S TOO "NON CANADIAN" NOW.

BE ASHAMED OF MAPLE LEAF FOREVER.

It really is a nice song. Maybe we can bring it back and tweak the lyrics. The last verse talks of unity too.

How about this as a 1st verse:

In Days of yore,

From Egypt's shore

Mohammed, the prophet hero came

And planted firm the multicultural

On Canada's political correctness.

Here may it be Asian,

Lebanese, Or Pakistani

And joined in love together,

All cultures entwined,

The Maple Leaf Forever.

The Maple Leaf

You can wear you vail,

The Maple Leaf Forever.

God save our immigrants, we'll send some ferries,

The Maple Leaf Forever.

Edited by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beats america's national anthem even though that is the second 'anthem'

Spangled web of a banner is a drinking song

and we like war, read the entire anthem makes that pretty clear.

Thin skinned we americans, like to hit people over the head hence the popularity of the three stooges.

We don't vote for ideas we vote for which one is less evil.

We care more about Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton

Kids pray to george bush cut outs

couldn't find DC on a map

didn't know mississippi was a state

think Canada's leader is President Poutine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beats america's national anthem even though that is the second 'anthem'

Spangled web of a banner is a drinking song

and we like war, read the entire anthem makes that pretty clear.

Thin skinned we americans, like to hit people over the head hence the popularity of the three stooges.

We don't vote for ideas we vote for which one is less evil.

We care more about Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton

Kids pray to george bush cut outs

couldn't find DC on a map

didn't know mississippi was a state

think Canada's leader is President Poutine.

:lol:

I convinced an American once that our leader was Emperor Tim Hortons, hence all the Tim Hortons restaurants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A friend gave this to me. ;)

2qi8v29.gif

Eheheh, I've seen that before. :P

I must say though, I prefer this one:

2004world1600.jpg

Politically correct map of the world from Uncyclopedia.org

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I've made this argument before but this thread needs a "I hate alberta oil fat cats rant"

Petro Canada makes roughly 18 billion BILLION dollars a year and its only going to go up in this century. I believe the government should own 50% of the company. The government would take that roughly 9 BILLION dollars A YEAR and invest it into high speed train routes and public transportation. While the other 9 BILLION would go for the oil business/salaries/jobs/stock prices and what not.

I forget how much control a government can have before it becomes government run and not privately run. But I believe Gaspron in Russia is government owned and they are still listed somewhere in some stock exchange.

The thing is, is that the car is dead. If you well plan out cities and suburbs instead of just sticking a bunch of houses in the middle of nowhere and connecting an express way to it you don't need a car. Granted if your rural person you'll always need one but if your a city dweller there is no need to use a car a daily commuter.

What would I do with that extra 9 BILLION dollars a year. It would go to two things and two things only

1) Expansion of metros in the country

2) High Speed rail development

Here's where I believe transit systems need to start going and what you could do with that 9 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR!!!

high speed rail link between Calgary and Edmonton,

expansion of Skytrain to UBC, North Vancouver, extending the main line to Langley, a Surrey to Richmond route so people in Surrey and surrounding areas can directly get to YVR without having to take Skytrain to downtown and switch onto Canada line (when its finished).

A train route from Downtown to Whistler (would have been great idea for the olympics although sea to sky did need updating).

Making the Windsor to Quebec City line a high speed train route.

Toronto expansion of public transit

An Ottawa to Gatineau public transit link.

Quebec City metro system

Expansion of Montreal Metro

A Halifax metro system

Expansion of Edmonton's system

A public transportation system for Victoria

Thats 9 billion dollars a year that could be spent in better places instead its going to the fat cats in Alberta.

But for some reason oil is seen as a western pride thing. Don't get that at all. Alberta is not a country its in Canada.

The confederation has run a muck.

You've got Quebec saying its hydro plants are there's even though its in Labrador.

Alberta saying its oil is there's and there's only.

Edited by Pierre the Great

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe the government should own 50% of the company.

The thing is, is that the car is dead.

The biggest consumer of oil products is dead, and the government should own 50% of Petro-Canada... so, you believe the government should invest in dying companies? :P

Anyway, the car is not dead. That sounds perhaps like more of a wish than a reality. Whether we truly need them or not, the fact is most people feel they can't live without a car, or have decided they will not. This is what makes the car very much alive. (The struggles of certain automakers in recent times are not due to the death of the car - since Toyota and others continue to thrive - but their own poor business decisions).

As far as the government investing in Petro-Canada - it's been done, and then they sold it. It's been proven time and time again that the government are not experts in running businesses (we're not sure what their expertise is yet, but it's not that). I'm sure they would waste no time in turning a $9 billion gain into something the taxpayers have to subsidize.

Governments are there to create equitable and stable conditions for businesses to operate, among other things. If you want high speed trains, taking over a profitable company isn't the way to do it. Just raise taxes, and you'll get your $9 billion. (I don't think they should do this, by the way, but if governments need money, taxation is how they get it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyway, the car is not dead.

The car, or any other form of personal motor vehicle transportation, is not going to die. Too American to die. Just because major metro areas have public transportation doesn't mean the rest of the country does. Public transport isn't all it's cracked up to be everywhere, either. Denver, the average commute to work is 9.6 miles. Last year, when my Saab died, I decided that since I lived in metro Denver, I'd take the bus for my 12 mile commute. My 12 mile commute via auto is about 20 minutes. Via bus? Over 2 hours. To save nearly three hours a day in commuting time, I'll always have a car. In fact, I've got two! Most people that take the light rail or bus to work don't do it because they don't have a vehicle. They do it to avoid rush hour traffic and to save money on parking. $60/month in bus passes works out a lot better than $200/month in parking. It by no means replaces their need (perceived or not) for a car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps if you live in a big city, public transit is the way to go, but in smaller communities, I just can't see it happening. In order for it to provide an effective alternative to owning your own vehicle, they would need routes approximately every ten minutes. There is no way that there would be enough people taking the bus to make each trip worthwhile, even if everyone in the community was using it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I say death to the car? (err yeah I kinda did oops)

No what I mean is that there are better ways of doing things. Look at Europe.

Coppenhagen, Denmark 40% ride a bike to work in cold wet and snowy DENMARK!!!

When you go on vacation in Europe what do you take? a train.

After the second world war Europe did it right they saw that the car was going to be a hassle. So they went to high speed trains, and extensive mass transit systems.

And if you want to talk about transit systems JLP lives in the most complex transit system in the world.

I'm not saying its the end of the car because rural people need cars there's no denying that. I'm talking about cars in the city.

Another thing I would do is tax the heck out of SUV's. A person in Miami does not need a Hummer. Heck a person in Denver doesn't need a Hummer. If you need to go off roading fine but if your car or truck never sees anything but pavement what is the point?

you buy a Tahoe you pay an extra fee.

If people started planning cities and communities the need for cars would go down. Thats a fact. Look at Europe. see how they did it. same with Japan.

plus people would be walking more obesity rates would plummet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this doesn't necessarily belong in the thread but the song has been changed. I didn't know.

Oh, land of blue unending skies,

Mountains strong and sparkling snow,

A scent of freedom in the wind,

Over the emerald fields below.

To thee we brought our hopes, our dreams,

For thee we stand together,

Our land of peace, where proudly flies,

The Maple Leaf forever.

Long may it wave, and grace our own,

Blue skies and stormy weather,

Within my heart, above my home,

The Maple Leaf forever!

Oh, Maple Leaf, around the world, You speak as you rise high above, Of courage, peace and quiet strength, Of the Canada that I love,

Remind us all, our union bound,

By ties we cannot sever,

Bright flag revered on every ground,

The Maple Leaf froever.

Long may it wave, and grace our own,

Blue skies and stormy weather,

Within my heart, above my home,

The Maple Leaf forever!

From East and West, our heroes came,

Throught icy fields and frozen bays,

Who conquered fear, and cold, and hate,

And their ancient wisdom says:

Protect the weak,

defend your rights,

And build this land together,

Above which shine the Northern Lights,

And the Maple Leaf forever!

Long may it wave, and grace our own,

Blue skies and stormy weather,

Within my heart, above my home,

The Maple Leaf forever!

I bet Leef fans love it. But, we can too. Newsy Lalonde wore the Leaf with the C inside. One of Montreal's original uniforms. We were Leafs first. Also, the song was written in 1867 so I'm not sure how Leaf fans have a right to claim it. Maybe Conn Smythe himself liked the song.

Anyway, this post isn't much of a "political spin" but; Why won't the powers that be make this song more "known" maybe? Promote? No?

We spend money on "flags". This seems unifying does it not?

Edited by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Guest
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...