[TheFixer]

I found this on cp24.com and found it quite interesting.

The Promised Land





The Ontario Liberals have broken promises to keep the hydro rate cap in place until 2006 and put a stop to all new construction on the Oak Ridges Moraine. The reason? They claim an inherited $5.6 billion debut is cramping their campaign pledge style.

“I think that what you really lack, so far at least in the current government, is the will and determination to try and even get to the bottom line,” says Tory Leader Ernie Eves. “They seem to be saying it was a very convenient excuse not to meet a lot of our commitments or to put them off.”

But Premier Dalton McGuinty is fighting back, telling the province to take a close look at what his party has done, not what it didn’t accomplish.

“We’re going to be introducing our bill that will deal with auto insurance premiums in the province of Ontario,” he said. “We've said that we're going to go ahead with an Ipperwash inquiry. We've done that. We said we're going to eliminate irresponsible tax cuts with respect to private school tax cut. We're doing what we think needs to be done and we're living up to our commitments.”

That may be, but a lot of Ontarians are still reeling from the news that his hydro commitment has been tossed, meaning their power bills will go up in April.



Based on what you've seen of the new government, would you still vote Liberal if an Ont. election were held today? To cast your ballot in our WebPoll, http://www.pulse24.com/News/Top_Story/2 ... 1/page.asp





November 26, 2003

[Rev_Blair]

Keep in mind who the other choice was, Fixer. I saw the Ontarion election very much as a vote against the PCs and their Alliance-style policies, not a vote for the Liberals.

[RoyalHighlander]

Rev_Blair Rev_Blair:

Keep in mind who the other choice was, Fixer. I saw the Ontarion election very much as a vote against the PCs and their Alliance-style policies, not a vote for the Liberals.

Sort of like picking the LESSER of two evils right?? Both are not good but one is less not good than the other...LOL

[laccam]

RoyalHighlander RoyalHighlander:

Rev_Blair Rev_Blair:

Keep in mind who the other choice was, Fixer. I saw the Ontarion election very much as a vote against the PCs and their Alliance-style policies, not a vote for the Liberals.

Sort of like picking the LESSER of two evils right?? Both are not good but one is less not good than the other...LOL

In the famous words of the simpsons "Vote quimby, this time he's the lesser of 2 evils" (I have nothing to contribute to the conversation since I'm from Manitoba, I'm just bored at school)

[Rev_Blair]

laccam, I'm from Manitoba too. That doesn't make the Ontario election or the issues facing Ontario irrelevant to us at all. As the most populous province in the country it gives an indication of what the voters there are thinking and what our neighbours are doing. We have common interests with much of Ontario, just as we do with Saskatchewan.

[TheFixer]

Taken from cp24.com


Problematic Province





The Tories became famous for their tax cuts. The Liberals may soon become famous for program cuts. Premier Dalton McGuinty is warning there may be cuts to all provincial services in an attempt to get the $5.6 billion deficit under control.

“We have a significant fiscal challenge before us. And we're not going to tackle this by nibbling around the edges and merely tinkering,” he said in Ottawa on Wednesday night. “We're going to take a couple of months to make that case so people understand that there's a need to do something beyond the usual.”

The Premier explained that the government will publicize a few options as far as spending cuts are concerned next year. Ontarians will be able to make their voices heard before the next provincial budget comes down. But McGuinty admitted each and every program will go under the microscope, as his team attempts to do battle with the deficit, which was passed on from the recently ousted Tories.

Meanwhile, some claim the Liberals are using the deficit as a crutch or an excuse to break campaign pledges. But the Liberal boss says he was surprised by former provincial auditor Erik Peters’ announcement that it stood at $5.6 billion.





November 27, 2003

[BadAssBookie]

McSquinty is a lier and a weasle. I can forgive lifting the rates on Hydro to pay for the deficit. We were paying for it anyway out of general operating funds.

What pees me off is the Oak Ridges Morain. He new full well when he made the promis to halt development that he would have to stand up to the developers. Now they threaten to sue and he folds like little girl.

Would somebody call an ambulance. I think McSquinty needs to have a backbone transplant.

[thirdEye]

Rev_Blair Rev_Blair:

Keep in mind who the other choice was, Fixer. I saw the Ontarion election very much as a vote against the PCs and their Alliance-style policies, not a vote for the Liberals.

The election was not necessarily a vote against the PC's, but rather a vote for a guy who lied through his teeth, made promises he knew he could not keep, and wooed everyone with his rhetoric.

The PC's did not have Alliance style policies under Ernie Eves. The party lost all of their focus after Harris left. But at least you credit the Alliance with actually having policies, which is more than can be said about any other party in the country today.

[Rev_Blair]

A bad policy...something the Alliance and the Ontario PCs under Harris, had an abundance of, is a very dangerous thing, Anti. The Eaves government was not tossing out the old Harris policies, just trying to repackage them in a more palatable form. They paid the price.

The results of the last election were very much a vote against neo-conservative politics.

[thirdEye]

Rev - Bad policies are only a dangerous thing to those who believe they are bad. I happen to believe that many (not all) of the policies of Harris were good, as are many of the Alliance party's. Just because you don't like them doesn't make them necessarily bad.

I would be interested to know what it is that you think Mike Harris did that was partucularly bad and why. Keep in mind at the same time that during the period that Mike Harris was in power, the economy of Canada boomed due in most part to the economies of Ontario and Alberta.

I would also be interested in knowing what Alliance policies you think are bad and why, while giving a Liberal party policy on the same subject that you think is good.

In general, most people have not even bothered to learn what the actual policies of the Alliance are. Then again most don't even know what the policies of the Liberal party are - if there even are any. Most people vote based on a few sound bites or around one or two hyped up issues and the feel-good rhetoric and promises of the liberal left. That's to be expected though since it has never been said that sheep are very intelligent.

Basically, the following sums up the attitude of Canada today - "Trudeau drove Canada so far left that today's opposition Canadian Alliance - a moderate centrist party by world standards - is routinely termed `rightwing' or `far right.' "

Sorry for the rant - I'm procrastinating.

[Rev_Blair]

Oh? What are you procrastinating about? Making your move to the US official?

Your profile says you are from Ottawa, so maybe you didn't grow up watching the Alliance form. It was very much driven by a far-right Christian magazine called Western Report. That particular magazine is gone but the racist, intolerant, homo-phobic, anti-Quebec, anti-eastern tone of that particular magazine is, to this very day, the driving force behind the Alliance or Reform Party or Conservatives or whatever the hell they've named themselves this week in an attempt to dupe the public.

The policies of the Alliance? You mean the official ones? Small government; less government spending; slightly reduced taxes (mostly for the rich); reduced social spending; relaxed environmental laws; relaxed foreign investment laws; increased military spending but with little or no emphasis on the UN and multi-lateralism and a lot of emphasis on joining unilateral US missions; tougher immigration policy (especially for non-American or non-Western European immigrants); reduced labour rights; outlawing abortion; two tier or user-pay medicine; fewer individual rights and freedoms, but more "rights" and freedoms for business. There's more, but I think you get the gist.

The basic policy of the Alliance is to do whatever the hell George Bush tells them to. That policy did not work for Canada when Mulroney was listening to Reagan and it will be even worse in today's climate.

I'm not a Liberal supporter, BTW. If you'd done your homework you would have noticed that, it isn't exactly a secret. I'll take the Liberals, even under Paul Martin, a million times before I'll even consider the Alliance though.

[thirdEye]

$1:

Oh? What are you procrastinating about? Making your move to the US official?

I've noticed that you often suggest that people who disagree with you move to the US. What makes you think I would want to move there? I have just as much right to be here as you do, despite the fact that you think, as if by diveine right, yours is the only opinion allowed. Then, that is not surprising considering the way esteemed left wing thinkers like Mao Tse-Tung and Stalin dealt with people that disagreed with them.

I would prefer to stay and fight for what I think is right in my own country. If I complain about Canada it's because I love it and I hate to see it going downhill.

$1:

the racist, intolerant, homo-phobic, anti-Quebec, anti-eastern tone of that particular magazine is, to this very day, the driving force behind the Alliance

Show me a specific example of evidence of this with source please.

The problem with people on the left is they are labellers. They throw out labels and smears against anybody who disgrees with them or has an alternate point of view. Nothing scares a lefty more than the truth. Besides, your assumtion that a party cannot grow and evolve from its roots is wrong. The liberal party of today is no where near the same as it was fifty or a hundred years ago. Frankly, I think the west has right to be anti-eastern. They've been getting shafted since Trudeau started his dance of destruction through Canada.

Funny, though, how the media in the country pounces all over some ridiculous anti-homsexual comments by an Alliance member, yet similar comments from a liberal MP slip by mostly unnoticed. The bias has almost become humourous. With the way the liberal-lefty elites run this country for themselves and by themselves, we could call Orwell a prophet if only he named Canada in any of his books.

As for the anti-Quebec thing, how do you figure? Because the west (and the rest of Canada) is tired of the country catering to the interests of one province? In that case, I guess I'm anti-Quebec as well. In fact I think Quebec and Canada would be better off without each other and should go their seperate ways. By the way, if you're pro-Quebec, does that make you anti-West? And is that any better than or worse than being anti-Quebec.

I suggest you read the policies of the Alliance first: here

Like this: "eliminate the tax burden on low-income families and individuals."

And: "The Constitution of Canada gives the provinces jurisdiction over social services, including health, education and training, and social assistance. We will respect our Constitution and refrain from intruding into the provincesÂ’ jurisdiction, including the formulation of social policy."

- Their policies don't mention abortion - though I'm sure if it came up it would go to referendum (unlike the current government who ram things through, the public be damned).

- Small government and less government spending - that's a good thing.

- Tougher immigration laws - long overdue.

- Two tier or user-pay medicine - we already have it: our politicians stick us in six month long waiting lists while they thumb their noses at us and get treatment in the US. We might as well just call ourselves serfs while our aristocracy entertain themselves in their gilded palaces.

- Actually, increased individual rights and freedoms.

$1:

The basic policy of the Alliance is to do whatever the hell George Bush tells them to. That policy did not work for Canada when Mulroney was listening to Reagan and it will be even worse in today's climate.

Your overt anti-Americanism is almost laughable. We're stuck living next to them, let's make the most of it. <cliche>People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.</cliche>

[Rev_Blair]

I often suggest that people who want Canada to become more Americanised move to the US. If their policies are so attractive to you, go live under them. Do not take my country and erode its policies and sovereignties so they are like those of the US.

Go find an issue of the magazine. Almost every issue has an example in it.

If you want evidence of same thing withing the Alliance, just look at what members of the party say and the policies that they promote. Bill C-36? Their only concern is that it wasn't tough enough. Maher Arar? First they liked that a Canadian citizen had been sent to Syria to be tortured. When that couldn't any reliable evidence that Arar was at all involved in terrorism, the Alliance blamed the Canadian government but did not criticise the American government. The Alliance stance on gay marriage? Stockwell Day's thoughts on Creationism? What about trade issues? environmental issues?

How do I figure the Alliance is anti-Quebec? Because of the things they say and do.

I have read the policies of the Alliance. How the hell are they going to cut federal taxes? By shifting the tax burden to the provinces. Not only is that a divisive policy, it's also one that leads to massive cuts in social spending, including education and health.

$1:

"The Constitution of Canada gives the provinces jurisdiction over social services, including health, education and training, and social assistance. We will respect our Constitution and refrain from intruding into the provincesÂ’ jurisdiction, including the formulation of social policy."

I don't know where or how you grew up, Anti. I went to school in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario though. I got my post-secondary education in Manitoba. Education needs to be as equal as possible across all of the provinces. It isn't. That's a real issue in a society where people move as much as they do. The same goes for other policies. Canada is one country, not 10 countries.

Alliance members have come out against access to abortion time and again. Most polls show that Canadians support access to abortion and the Supreme Court agrees with most Canadians.

Referendums are a poor way to govern btw. They are expensive, divisive, and do nothing to limit the tyanny of the majority. That's a basic democratic principle.

Small government and less spending usually means that a government is not governing. Since their job is to protect the interests of the Canadian people, and since I pay them with my tax dollars, I want them doing their job.

Tougher immigrations laws are good? Come on...we built this country by inviting people in. We still more people. The world has a population problem and we have room. Tougher immigration laws are just a cover for racism, especially as promoted by the Alliance. You know, I never hear people from the NDP or the Liberals suggest that people who move to Canada should learn our languagnge or adopt our culture first. Whenever I hear an Alliance supporter talk about immigration, that issue comes up as soon as think nobody important is listening. They are also the only party in Canada that mistakes Canadian values for Christian values.

Increased rights and freedoms for who? The only problem the Alliance had with the rights-raping Bill C-36 is that it wasn't tough enough. They support Canadians being forced to carry an identity card...an internal passport. They support lower standards for people being arrested and laws that limit the right to protest. They came out against gay marriage. They've come out against native rights. In short the Alliance is against personal rights and freedoms. These are all things that are on the Parliamentary Record.

What you see as overt anti-Americanism isn't. It's pro-Canadianism. It's a recognition that the American system is failing. It's an understanding that capitalism and democracy are NOT interchangeable words. It's even pro-Americanism...I've read their constitution and the ideas of some of their greatest political thinkers. I challenge them to live up to those ideas and ideals at home and abroad.

[thirdEye]

$1:

I often suggest that people who want Canada to become more Americanised move to the US. If their policies are so attractive to you, go live under them. Do not take my country and erode its policies and sovereignties so they are like those of the US.

Your country? How arrogant of you. I don't want Canada to become more Americanized, I want to go back to the way it was before people like you "eroded its policies" so it became nothing more than a banana republic. It is policies that you support that have eroded Canadian sovereignty and made it nothing more than an American protectorate. Canada has never been weaker and it has turned its back on its proud and strong history. May I suggest to you that if you want Canada to become more like Europe then go move there. If their policies are so attractive to you go live under them. Do not take this country and erode its policies and sovereignties so they are like those of the France.

An interesting article on the history of Canada.

$1:

just look at what members of the party say and the policies that they promote.

One man does not a party make. Unless you are Jean Chretien of course. Larry Spencer is an idiot. So what? He doesn't make the party policy. Neither does Stockwell Day. So what if he believes in creationism? I don't, you don't. But you seem to think somehow that his personal beliefs somehow make him less of a person with less rights than you. Funny how you preach tolerance yet you have none yourself. How arrogant. How hypocritical.

$1:

Canada is one country, not 10 countries.

Wrong. Canada is two countries - Quebec and the rest. Besides, it is the constitution the defines provinical and federal jurisdiction. Are you suggesting that it be scrapped and rewritten to suit your needs? Or do you recognize that due to regional differences, that are bound to happen in a country this large, provinces should have control over things as they see fit. Quebec gets to call all of its own shots. Why shouldn't the other provinces be able to?

Funny how you mention Maher Arar but not Bill Samspon. I suppose you will also be an apologist for Khadr despite the fact that he has admitted, in Canada, of his own free will, that he trained in an al-Qaeda terrorist camp. Besides, there are still suspicions about Arar. If you don't think that there are terrorists here taking advantage of lax Canadian policy and naive socialist do-gooders then you are in for a rude awakening.

$1:

Referendums are a poor way to govern btw. They are expensive, divisive, and do nothing to limit the tyanny of the majority. That's a basic democratic principle.

Funny, Switzerland uses them quite frequently and that seems lika an awefully nice place to live. (Now you tell me to go live there, right?) If the tyranny of the majority is bad the tyranny of the minority worse. Canada is now run by the tyranny of the minority. Every revolution in the past has been a revolt against the tyranny of the minority. A revolt against the tyranny of the majority is called a coup. Funny how you preach about eroded democracy yet you complain about majority rule. You can't have it both ways you know. You either have democracy or you have a totalitarian state governed by the dictates of those who think they know what is best for everyone (see: dictatorship).

$1:

Tougher immigration laws are just a cover for racism

That's pure B.S. I favour tougher immigration laws yet I am not rascist. Typical lefty way of thinking though. Minimize everything into simple arrangements and defame those who disagree with your views.

If you want to continue to be an apologist for terrorists and turn a blind eye to the fact that they are here and they would seek to do us harm, then go ahead. Just be prepared to pay the price.

$1:

What you see as overt anti-Americanism isn't. It's pro-Canadianism. It's a recognition that the American system is failing.

It's so nice that you can recognize faults in others but cannot recognize our own faults. Why can't you challenge Canada to live up to it's own ideas and ideals? It is symptomatic of one with low self-esteem to consistently point out the faults of others while failing to recognize their own.

[Rev_Blair]

It is my country, Anti-left. You can tell because I insist on trying to build it up instead of trying to tear it down. You, on the other hand, have not said one positive thing about this country since you showed up here.

I don't want Canada to become more like Europe, I want it to be more like Canada. That means looking for other trading partners, including Europe and Asia, because we are far too dependent on the US. That means taking part in UN initiatives regardless of what the US wants us to do. It means giving aid to African states for AIDS and other issues no matter how much George Bush and Bobby Zoellick rant, rave and threaten.

My Canada is one country, not two. Quebec is part of that country and we would be worse off without it. Next time you want a six pack and your beer store is closed, imagine you have to go through customs twice to get that cold beer.

I didn't say "the member" of the party, I said "the members." It became very apparent during the gay marriage issue that Alliance was still very much driven by the misplaced morality of the religious right. They've had this recurring problem since their inception...their members stand up in front of groups of people with microphones and cameras and start thumping bibles and acting like semi-literate hicks. It isn't the press that paints them that way, it is the Alliance that paints itself.

I have all the tolerance on earth and the patience of a saint, Anti. Maybe the saint is a tad short-tempered these days, but I've been fighting this battle for a little over twenty years now...I get ill-tempered when my scars itch. I support those people's rights to show up at the church of their choice and teach their kids whatever fables they want. I do not think they have a right to impose their morals on me though.

Bill Sampson was not arrested by American spies and shipped to Syria to be tortured by a less-than-neutral third party, Anti. He was arrested in Saudi Arabia for a crime commited there. I don't think he committed that crime and I don't think his case was well-handled at all. I think that needs to be investigated as well, but at least try to stay on topic, will you?

In regard to Khdar, you seem not to like the fact that one of our own was very likely involved in terrorist activities. That's fine, I don't either. He was the result of social conservatism and it led him astray. He's still a Caandian citizen. He's never been a citizen of another country. That makes him our responsibility. The real issue with waht happened to him is not the real issue though. The real issues are that his Canadian identity meant nothing to the US and that somebody, possibly a member of a US government agency, threatened a lawyer's life based on that lawyer's choice of client.


I'm not sure the Swiss would tolerate you, Anti. They have a tradition of preciseness and reason, not to mention keeping quiet about things they don't understand. I don't want Canada to be Switzerland either. Hell, I don't even want us to be Scotland, and they've made some really cool political advancements. I want us to be Canada. You seem to have a problem with that.

What tougher immigration laws are you pushing? Examine them carefully for racist overtones, little buddy...You know I will, probably already have. I have a bit of a race-based theory of my own, it goes like this, "If you look at old pictures, people used to be a lot uglier. As we've inter-bred, we've all gotten prettier. If you look at old policies and ideas, we used to be stupider. As we've interbred, both in the traditional sense and through the exchange of ideas, we've gotten smarter. The only sane thing to do is to invite people from all over the world to come here and breed ideas and children. It really isn't a lot different than breeding a new kind of dog."


If you would have taken the time to read my posts you would have discovered that I do challenge Canada and Canadians to live up to our ideas and ideals. Hell, I'm challenging you right now, and you claim to be Canadian. I also challenge politicians, business leaders, and members of unions and social movements on a daily basis.