The people have reclaimed Canada

[Moe_in_Texas]

Conservatives are returning to power in Canada. The people have had enough of socialism and a tax and spend Gov. This is wonderful news. Maybe the Blue State folks need to move somewhere other than Canada?
Conservatives are on the move. Thanks to Fox News and talk radio, the word is getting out. The people are being educated and are standing up for what they believe. The people continue to reclaim .

From Lonestartimes:

Canada Goes Conservative
by Songbird | 01/24/2006 9:25 am | Alert moderator


In case you haven’t heard the news, our frozen neighbors to the north have finally seen the light. Yep, that’s right — Canadian voters yesterday voted the Conservative Party into power in parliament, hoisting the economist and social conservative Stephen Harper to the position of Prime Minister.


Conservative Stephen Harper pledged to quickly carry out his campaign promises to cut taxes, get tough on crime and repair strained ties with Washington after his party won national elections and ended 13 years of Liberal Party rule in Canada.

Of course, the Associated Press cannot risk the appearance of giving a fair and balanced report — that might infringe on another network’s trademark, of course — so the writer was quick to throw this in:


Monday’s vote showed that Canadians are weary of the Liberal Party’s broken promises and corruption scandals. They were willing to give Harper a chance to govern despite concerns that some of his social views are extreme.


http://lonestartimes.com/2006/01/24/canada-goes-conservative/

[Outsider]

Canadian Conservatives are a teeny bit more left that American Liberals.

[hardeeharhar]

Moe,

Are conservative views always the view of the people?

Or in other words, in countries where nominally liberal parties lead, like say the UK, those countries don't have government's chosen by the people?

Are you making the decision a priori that this amorphous concept of the people can only be conservative?

[e1618978]

Moe - that tax and spend liberal has reduced the national debt dramatically, and that was when he was lining his pockets at the same time.

[curiousuburb]

Corruption is bad, mmmmmkay?

The voters booted a party too long used to abusing power and habitual cronyism.

If there's a trend, I think it's the Elephants down South of Canada who should be worried.

That, and the wingnuts and 'thumpers in Harper's party who couldn't keep their mouths shut before and undermined his chances (including Harper - who once suggested that humans and dinosaurs were contemporaneous species :rolleyes: ) were shoved out of microphone range for the duration of the campaign.

There was little if any support for Harper's extreme social agenda (rolling back Gay Marriage, Abortion rights, and undoing liberal Social and Medicare policies). His minority government can't push those issues or it will fall quickly due to the opposition of the majority of MPs (and Canadians, according to all polls).

You need to get your information from somewhere other than the Limbaugh echo chamber, Moe.
Cluelessness doesn't wash much with Canucks.

[progmac]

Originally posted by Moe_in_Texas

Conservatives are on the move. Thanks to Fox News and talk radio, the word is getting out.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Gene Clean]

The People Are On The March.™

[addabox]

One people. One leader. One destiny. Tomorrow belongs to us.

[Tulkas]

Originally posted by e1618978
Moe - that tax and spend liberal has reduced the national debt dramatically, and that was when he was lining his pockets at the same time.

Correct. But, the only thing they did to reduce spending was to not pay their share of things like health care, education etc. They offloaded their share of these to the provinces, leaving them stuck with the bills. So, the provinces, legally obligated to provide the services, had ot keep spending the money. There were no spending reductions, just a shell game of who was paying. Of course at the same time, the feds continued to collect the taxes that were supposed to pay for these things. So, having a surplus is quite easy. It is easy to say you are cutting spending if you just stop paying your bills. I think I will eliminate my debt tomorrow by not paying my mortgage...if only I could find a way to force the bank to pay my mortgage...

So, they were still the tax and spend liberals. Just that they did the taxing and obligated others to do the spending.

Moe: the Liberals are hardly hardcore socialists. They are simply a party with no position on most issues. They will tell anyone anything the want to hear. When it comes time to make a decision, they will generally end up with the one with the least political blowback..usually the decision ends up being to take no action. As far as socialism goes; the concepts that you would take as socialism, i.e universal health care, aiding the poor etc, are pretty much entrenched in the Canadian psyche. No party would want to dismantle these institutions, regardless of what the extremists say. The difference between the parties on social institutions is really a matter of interpretation. For instance, on the left, they will rage against a 'two-tiered' health care system, saying it give preferrential treatment to the rich, allowing them to jump the queue so to speak. Those on the right would argue that allowing private treatment alongside public health care can only benefit the universal health care. For every rich person that jumps out of line for an MRI (and the lines can be months long) and pays for a private clinic, opens a spot in the line for the next person, making their wait that little bit shorter.

Outsider was right about the Canadian right still being left of the American left.

As far as Harper being right wing extermist... he would not stand out in either of the American parties.

[Gene Clean]

Moe: the Liberals are hardly hardcore socialists. They are simply a party with no position on most issues.

Ooh, I've heard this one before.

[Tulkas]

Originally posted by Gene Clean
Ooh, I've heard this one before.
Then you should be quite proud of being well informed.

By tradition, the Liberal party in Canada is the centrist party. On any given issue, they will shoot for the middle. This should not be taken as a critisism in general. A party that is built on the ideal of compromise can be a nobel endeavour and well worth supporting. Unfortunately, the ideal does not always survive the implementation.

[BR]

Dear Moe,

"Mama Maureen, the America of my time line is a laboratory example of what can happen to democracies, what has eventually happened to all perfect democracies throughout all histories. A perfect democracy, a 'warm body' democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens . . . which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it . . . which for the majority translates as 'Bread and Circuses."

Quote from To Sail Beyond the Sunset by Robert A. Heinlein.

[progmac]

this thread has solidified my suspicions that moe_in_texas is a parody. a search quickly turned up showing he's never posted anywhere but AO. i think most of us at least started on AI because of Mac-related interests.

[rageous]

Originally posted by progmac
this thread has solidified my suspicions that moe_in_texas is a parody. a search quickly turned up showing he's never posted anywhere but AO. i think most of us at least started on AI because of Mac-related interests.

yep.

[Outsider]

So who's behind it? Or is Moe some manifestation of our deepest darkest fears of what a worst case senario Bushista would act like. He(it?) does like to post in the 3rd person.

[Outsider]

Also be aware that this loon beleives that the Earth is 6,000 years old and humans and dinosaurs co-existed(!)

http://www.valleyskeptic.com/harper_pupet_bush_Layer.jpg

[e1618978]

Originally posted by curiousuburb
There was little if any support for Harper's extreme social agenda (rolling back Gay Marriage, Abortion rights, and undoing liberal Social and Medicare policies). His minority government can't push those issues or it will fall quickly due to the opposition of the majority of MPs (and Canadians, according to all polls).

If he teamed up with the Bloc, he could allow Quebec Soverenty (or maybe some step along the way) in exchange for his social agenda in the rest of Canada - together the two parties have a majority.

If he got rid of Quebec, it would be a lot easier to promote his "pro-western" platform as well.

Maybe not very likely, just an idea.

[progmac]

Originally posted by Outsider
So who's behind it?
ex or current board member who likes to get people all fire up or whatever, i would say. he plays sort of an important role though, he is the non-thinking neocon that most of us on the board paint all modern republicans to be.

[addabox]

Note, also, that Moe tends to swing intermittently between "all I know I learned from old John Birch pamphlets I found in the attic" and a strikingly different conversational tone that seems to creep in from time to time.

Kinda like someone who isn't quite sure how a rock ribbed conservative is supposed to talk when they're not just saying things like "The brave defenders of American virtue will prevail not matter what the cost".

[Anders]

So what flag are you gonna put on your back pack now when going to Europe ;)

Yes I watch DS

[Frank777]

I stayed out of this thread because Moe didn't really grasp the Canadian situation, and I didn't want to do the necessary lecturing.

Speaking of Americans who don't have a clue, someone needs to tell Al Gore (http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=c6671bd6-570c-4e6b-8752-bc9fcf57c12e&k=27679) to sit down and be quiet.

Gore accuses 'Big Oil' of financially backing the Tories, despite the fact that Canadian electoral financing laws don't allow company contributions over $1000.00 a year.

And if he knew anything about Canadian politics, he'd know that the major recipients of corporate donations are the Liberals, while the Tories/Reform party generally relies on more individual donations.

Perhaps you should learn about a country's political system before commenting on it.

Oh no! Harper has a pro-oil agenda! Of course, genius. He's from ALBERTA.

That's like saying Vegas residents are sympathetic to gambling interests.


Canadians, Gore said, should vigilantly keep watch over prime minister-designate Stephen Harper because he has a pro-oil agenda and wants to pull out of the Kyoto accord -- an international agreement to combat climate change.

It's funny that the Canadian Left is always worried about right -wing Americans dictating to our country. But the only Americans who intervene in our politics and try to tell us what to do are people like Gore and
Michael Moore (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php).

[Gene Clean]

Originally posted by Frank777
And if he knew anything about Canadian politics, he'd know that the major recipients of corporate donations are the Liberals, while the Tories/Reform party generally relies on more individual donations.

Well yes because big companies can't "donate" money to politicians using middle-men at all.

[Frank777]

Originally posted by Gene Clean
Well yes because big companies can't "donate" money to politicians using middle-men at all.

This isn't the U.S., where even the Chinese can sink a quarter million into a campaign and go undetected. A determined company would have to find fifty people to do that.

And then they'd have to prove to the party they did it, if they wanted favours.

While I'm sure 'Big Oil' CEO contributions skew heavily Conservative, saying that the industry is "bankrolling the party" should require at least some evidence.

[Gene Clean]

Originally posted by Frank777
This isn't the U.S., where even the Chinese can sink a quarter million into a campaign and go undetected. A determined company would have to find fifty people to do that.

Oh, right. The Mighty Laws of Ye Olde Canada make your companies immune to corrupting, using money for political influence and other US-only acts of good faith.

[Frank777]

Originally posted by Gene Clean
Oh, right. The Mighty Laws of Ye Olde Canada make your companies immune to corrupting, using money for political influence and other US-only acts of good faith.

I never said that. The election was actually centred around a corruption scandal that saw the Liberal party having to return millions of dollars to the public purse.

Money was being traded in brown envelopes and a government commission was called.

That, in large part, was why the Conservatives were elected.

But before a politician like Gore starts accusing another country's politicians of being 'bought', shouldn't he provide some kind of proof?

[rageous]

Originally posted by Frank777
But before a politician like Gore starts accusing another country's politicians of being 'bought', shouldn't he provide some kind of proof?

No.

Proof takes time.

Don't you know that in politics it's better to make one accusation after another until one ends up sticking?

[Outsider]

Originally posted by Frank777
That's like saying Vegas residents are sympathetic to gambling interests.

Gambling is not ruining the environment.

[Frank777]

Originally posted by Outsider
Gambling is not ruining the environment.

Okayyyy.

Of all the responses I envisioned, that one never crossed my mind.

I suppose a lot of people don't stop by their local church, where you easily find pastors dealing with the addictions, family breakdowns, suicides, bankruptcies, thefts and other fallouts from our society's cashgrab on the weak and poor.

But hey, it's not spewing toxins into the air so it's not a problem.



Anyway, back to asking Gore for that proof....:D

[e1618978]

Originally posted by rageous
No.

Proof takes time.

Don't you know that in politics it's better to make one accusation after another until one ends up sticking?

Gore just saw a chance to get a little exposure and pollitical capital, and spoke before doing any research. It doesn't matter anyway, he is too fat to be president now.

[jimmac]

Originally posted by Outsider
So who's behind it? Or is Moe some manifestation of our deepest darkest fears of what a worst case senario Bushista would act like. He(it?) does like to post in the 3rd person.

Naw. He's just someone like MaDtOol ( or what ever his name was ) or Miss Tron or any of the other multiple handles that guy had. That's if you've been around long enough to remember the " Truth Train ". I haven't taken Moe seriously for a long time.

[midwinter]

I have suspected for some time now that Moe (didn't More used to be a girl? and 15? And then at one point 50?) is actually Sir Moe_in_Texas O' the Isles.

[Anders]

Hello you two. Remember this?:

Civil, factually informed political discussion.

This is not the forum of DNC. The objective here is to make arguments in a discussion WITH our opponents, not against them.

Do you believe in a constructive debate? Or are you just in this to try to ridicule people?

If you really think someone is posing as someone else who were banned please make a PM or email. Else keep those comment to yourselves.

[midwinter]

Well. And on that note...

/whistles nervously....

Crazy weather we're having, isn't it?

--

As an aside: I think it's really funny that admins like Bush's really want to see similarly right-wing governments installed in other countries (Canada, Germany, Israel), and then—with the exception of Germany—they seem to do nothing but piss the US off by behaving like, well, Bush. Harper's thing about the armed icebreakers (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=b6be9e04-faa6-469a-af2b-e904eb054851&k=14045) made me chuckle, sort of like how after 9/11 Sharon clamped down really hard on the Palestinians at a point when the admin was trying to wage a "We don't hate Muslims!" PR campaign.

[Frank777]

I don't think the Icebreaker thing was that simple.

Occasionally, when a new administration comes into power, the U.S. will lob an issue over the border that's something of a test to see how far the newbies are willing to go to please/irritate Uncle Sam.

Many Canadian observers think Harper passed this one, by being firm and clear on where Canada stands, not backing down, but not delving into the anti-American overtones of the previous administration.

[Outsider]

Originally posted by midwinter
Well. And on that note...

/whistles nervously....

Crazy weather we're having, isn't it?

yeah, it's the global warming (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4660938.stm).