The Canadian Federal Election of 2011

[GrooveTunes]

"Oh fercryinginthesink .............. who the hell forced those people to buy into things they could not afford and should not have bought in the first place? What?????????"

I couldn't care less about those people. It's the rest of us that are going to end up paying for it that I'm concerned about.

[I Think]

So this harper love in is supporting the guy whose government cut the meat packing plant inspectors allowing listeria to run wild.

[NAB]

GF wrote: "The X's and Y's are really not in such a bad position ... in fact the Y's will be more numerous than the Boomers ... but, of course, the Boomers are a very convenient scape goat for the X's indulgences and irresponsibility in their spending habits."

Interesting thought GF. Although not particularly on topic, it may be a line of rationale that some of the longer term thinkers, particularly the Liberal left wing thinkers (now there's an oxymoron LOL) are erroneously building into their short term plans. i.e. it's ok to overspend today because tomorrow there will be more people around to pay the bill. In essence, it's the same kind of faulty thinking that the Greenies use when they use emotionally charged future generations arguments regarding the environment - i.e. we must shoot ourselves in the economic foot and reduce our standard of living today in order that our children and grandchildren don't have the same economic opportunities that the boomers did, and therefore cannot continue to destroy the planet as the boomers did.

Both ideologies fail the test of reality, since all people past, present, and future are subject to the same weaknesses of runaway desire and greed relative to their times as the boomers (and their modern governments) have been (and will continue to be into their retirement - the scorched earth reference made by HP earlier I suspect).

A hundred and fifty years ago it was common for "families" to produce many many children. Not because they loved children more than parents (and governments) today do, but because it was necessary to produce labour self sufficiency to help the family unit survive by its own labour resources. That attitude (and need) prevailed well into the 1940's and fifties, particularly in rural Canada. Even the boomer generation is a result of "man's" natural instinct for survival of the species as it tried to make up for massive losses due to war and and other population reducing disasters like famine and disease.

Now, personal desire and greed seem to be headed strongly in the direction of NOT producing "more" people to spread the costs being produced by the me me me more more more generations among. And that is where the new Liberals socialist philosophy falls apart, as reflected in this election. Mostly "Boomers" themselves and approaching retirement, they seemingly think they can return Canada to the good old days of the sixties and seventies, and their kids and grandkids can pay the bills to support them in the manner to which they have become accustomed. Well, they had better wake up pretty quick, because odds are there are going to be ever fewer kids and grandkids, not more, no matter how much they profess to offer to "put families first". Human greed, nature, and instinct will see to that.

Anyway, back to the topic. What we have it appears to me is that a power greedy coalition of opposition parties have produced an unprecedented four elections in seven years. Recently they "fired" a government that had a mandate under our system from the people in the last election to continue to govern. They have been working unsuccessfully to that end for over five years now, and will continue to do so and obstruct the good and stable governance needed for the times.

Well, IMO it is time for the people to rise up and fire that "opposition coalition from hell", ...and give a clear mandate to a majority government, one way or the other. The people have a clear choice now - Blue Door or Red Door, Conservative or Liberal. Anything else will just produce another repeat of the behaviour of the last 5 or six years, and yet another costly election within a couple of years I would speculate. I agree with Ignatieff on one point... Enough is Enough!, at least from the "Opposition Coalition from Hell".

Nab

[steven lloyd]

So this harper love in is supporting the guy whose government cut the meat packing plant inspectors allowing listeria to run wild.

No, this Harper “love-in” ( as you so sullenly put it) is the simple recognition by sane and practical people that any of the other choices are simply not affordable. We can’t afford the loss in trade, the loss in investment, the loss in job creation, and the invariable increase in taxation. I agree it is a shame when we are forced to support a government with such questionable ethics, but the Liberals certainly can’t claim to take the high road there. And while Layton and May might have no problem campaigning on ethics, their economy-killing platforms are far too great a risk.

I’ve previously supported the NDP in federal elections just to provide some counterbalance in Parliament, and it has been noted by numerous pundits that this last minority government under Harper was actually one of the most (if not the most) productive minority governments in our history. It’s too bad the big babies (Iggy, Layton and the Deuce) couldn’t put the best interests of Canadians ahead of their own self-interests (any of these guys questioning the ethics of another is a pathetic sham and joke – one that I won’t fall for). They deserve to get decimated in this next election and I hope they do. For that reason, and the fact my MP (Nathan Cullen) forwarded a motion in Parliament to erect “closed for business” signs along our west coast, I will vote Conservative in this next election.

[grumpydigger]

Spend like a drunken sailor,suspends citizen's rights like at the G. 20 Summit, he prorogued the government at will when things get a little tuff and being in contempt of Parliament.

Are the people of Canada really stupid enough to want more of this

It was a coalition of the Reform party and the conservative party that brought Harper to power.........but yet he condemn any other parties that want to group together and take him down.

Harper is very scared this time around because if he doesn't get a majority government his own people will start sharpening their knives.............

[NAB]

I was just now listening to a speech by Gilles Duceppe, regarding that 2004 letter that he, Layton, and Harper put together to the Governor General as the Martin Liberals minority government started to fall apart. Ya know, that Duceppe would make an excellent Prime Minister were it not for the fact that he is dedicated to the separation of Canada rather than its unification LOL. He certainly is a master at manipulation, smoke, and mirrors if nothing else.

He takes a simple one page (or less) letter that says absolutely nothing about what he claims was really an attempt by Harper to form a coalition (it was nothing of the sort) and, in the true form of the showman he is tries to render ad nauseum his own interpretation of it as "proof" of what Harper "intended". What a crock LOL. Suddenly, not only is he an eloquent political showman, ...but he is trying to demonstrate his proficiency as a circus mind reader to boot.

But he is also very transparent. He knows that he has to feed the anti Harper hate emo, even if he has to distort and mislead to do it. Of all the parties, in this election his Bloc separatist party have the most to lose of any if Harper achieves his majority. And he knows full well that, if the Liberals form a minority government (or even a majority), he, Duceppe, will be in an excellent position to extract, from an "easy" and historically scandal plagued Liberal party, ...ever more dollars for Quebec from the rest of Canadians so he can continue to claim that the Bloc is still relevant when in fact it is not.

Nab

[steven lloyd]

Are the people of Canada really stupid enough to want more of this

No - it is the simple recognition (simple for most people) that any of the other choices are simply not affordable. We can’t afford the loss in trade, the loss in investment, the loss in job creation, and the invariable increase in taxation. I agree it is a shame when we are forced to support a government with such questionable ethics, but the Liberals certainly can’t claim to take the high road there. And while Layton and May might have no problem campaigning on ethics, their economy-killing platforms are far too great a risk. People want to be able to earn to meet their needs and support their families.

[grumpydigger]

historically scandal plagued Liberal party

I believe the Harper government brought that to a new level by being the first government ever , to be in contempt of Parliament

[steven lloyd]

I believe the Harper government brought that to a new level by being the first government ever , to be in contempt of Parliament

Last night on the news it was reported the two primary concerns of Canadians in this election are healthcare and the economy. Ethics in government was last on the list. That might be disappointing, but more realistically it is probably the simple recognition that all parties are the same in that regard. Best we all just have the opportunity to work, and to care for ourselves and our families. No one trusts the Liberals or NDP not to destroy the fragile economic recovery (and certainly no one trusts the Green party in this regard), and it seems that is what is most important for most Canadians.

[NAB]

historically scandal plagued Liberal party

I believe the Harper government brought that to a new level by being the first government ever , to be in contempt of Parliament

LOL. That's just political gabbleflab by the left wing and separatist coalition that outnumbers the government grumpy, and as transparent as hell as to what their agenda has been, and will be in future. Make no mistake, that coalition was and is nothing without the support of the Bloc. And it rather surprises me that supporters of the Liberals and the NDP (much the same folk these days IMO) would even think of sinking to such historical lows as to promote the breakup of Canada by accepting the support of a party dedicated to that specific goal. To me that is far more shameful than any major scandals (Liberal) or minor scandalettes (Conservative)..

Edit to add: Munch the numbers in the last parliament yourself since you are among those who continually try to present the idea that the majority of Canadians are represented by the opposition. Fact is, the Bloc are not a national party and, as such, cannot be considered representative of that concept. There are only two truly nationalist parties that were represented in Parliament, and they were a minority compared to the Conservatives. From a nationalist perspective, the majority of the country elected the Conservatives to govern - not just once, but three times! But Ignatieff doesn't consider that "democratic" for some obscure (hidden agenda) reason.

I don't knock the NDP as much as the Liberals, except that in this campaign (as well as the last one) Layton trying to project himself as running to be Prime Minister is either rather naive IMO, or an attempted diversion to hide his real agenda (coalition). He has in the past, and always will be, the primary architect in promoting that vision of a government for Canada, whether it was between himself, Dion, and Duceppe most recently, or between himself, Harper, and Duceppe in 2004. The word ho continually comes to mind with Layton and the NDP.

Nab

[NAB]

.....And let's not forget, over this whole period, there are only three parties who have ever put in writing and formalized an agreement to take power without going to the people in an election through forming a formal coalition... The NDP, the Liberals, and the Bloc Quebecoise. The NDP and the Liberals could not do it alone because of their inferior numbers to the Conservatives and, in order to steal power without an election, were not just prepared - but actually formally did, rely on a separatist non-federalist party to prop up their undemocratic and destructive efforts at a power grab. I don't believe that agreement has been torn up just because Ignatieff tries with unclear waffle words to convince us it was.

Iggnatieff is the last one on earth who should be lecturing TRUE Canadians on the principles of democracy, nationalism, and confederation. And now he even expresses pride in having brought the government down and sees it as 'democratic' in how it was done. Not only shameful and harmful to the economic recovery and our international relationships (and by extension to all Canadians and national unity), ...but highly hypocritical as well.

Nab

[Logitack]

Iggnatieff is the last one on earth who should be lecturing us on the principles of democracy, nationalism, and confederation.

Nab

oooh puuulease.... the conservatives and harper would have done the SAME thing if they were the opposition party and the liberals were the minority government. It is part of the rules for ALL parties to use whenever there is a minority government.

the fact remains that the conservatives and harper were in contempt of parliament. Even the speaker of the house, a conservative, said as much in his ruling. The conservatives were the ones who refused to provide full disclosure on legislation that an all committee reviewing that legislation demanded. They knew this would force an election yet they did it anyway. Not to mention the negative ads they have been running for the past few months where NO election call was being considered. WHO is playing political games here....it is the conservatives!

what should be of concern to western Canada is the fact that Harper is ignoring the West and kowtowing to the Quebec. Considering Harper is from the WEST, why is the WEST continuing to be ignored! (of course the liberals also are ignoring the West, so no difference in policy with either party)

[NAB]

the fact remains that the conservatives and harper were in contempt of parliament. Even the speaker of the house, a conservative, said as much in his ruling.

Sorry Logi, that is not at all "fact". A coalition of opposition parties, through a stacked committee whose voting membership outnumbered the Conservative voting members, decided that the Harper Conservatives were in "contempt of Parliament" ((in their committee majority (by one vote) opinion, not in a court of law)), based on a ruling of the speaker of the house who WAS NOT a Conservative, but rather a LIBERAL! Please get your facts straight before posting such stuff. You usually try to be more accurate than that, even though your political and economic ideology is different than mine.

I am of the view that, had the Bloc not held the balance of voting power on that committee, that the "findings" and resulting 2 page report would have been entirely different had the opposing view been able to see the light of day, and the courts been allowed to deal with it rather than a power hungry group of misfits.

Edit to add: And that ruling by the Liberal speaker was his political swan song anyway, as he had already decided not to run again in an election so he could not be publically scrutinized over it.

Nab

[Logitack]

based on a ruling of the speaker of the house who WAS NOT a Conservative, but rather a LIBERAL! Please get your facts straight before posting such stuff. I am of the view that, had the Bloc not held the balance of voting power on that committee, that the findings would have been entirely different.

Nab

Oops, my bad. he has been speaker for so long and the conservatives have been in power for 7 years, i forgot he was a liberal. other than that, the speaker did rule they were in contempt, and considering they elected him as speaker, he must be viewed as "impartial" in his ruling.

notwithstanding that, the conservatives are JUST as guilty to the political games that you accuse the liberals, ndp, and bloc of playing. That was my main point. the conservatives CAUSED this election just as much as the opposition parties. In fact, the conservatives WANTED to have an election and were DARING the opposition to have a non confidence vote.

lets get back to reality here, which party is the better choice? I have already predicted the conservatives will get a slim majority this time around. I wont be voting for them, they have done little for the west as I would expect since Harper is from the west!

[NAB]

Well, given the edit points I added to my post after your quote Logi, I seriously question if the Speaker was really all that impartial in his rulings. But non the less, I would be interested in what evidence you have that the speaker himself actually ruled the Harper Government was in contempt of parliament and, even if you can provide such proof, was it based on his own analysis or simply the incomplete mini-report from the committee, stacked in favour of the opposition coalition by one separatist non national party vote?

I do however agree that this election was most probably Harper's to choose, and the opposition walked willingly and naively into the trap.

Nab