News: Election call ‘between Friday and Sunday’
John Deere closure shocks Welland, 800 jobs lost
Greens hire lawyer to fight for debate spot
TSX plunges more than 450 points
Dion dismisses gloomy poll
Campaigning in Guelph on Monday, Green leader Elizabeth May said now that she has an MP – for the next 40 days anyway – she expects to be in the televised leaders’ debate, or else. She’s gonna sue. Tough words. They didn’t even come with a trademark hug.
Now, I’ve said often that I like this woman. I’ve even said she belongs in Parliament. If we can have thirty or forty Quebec separatists sitting there, then why the hell not have a few MPs who are passionate about the planet? That, I am sure, was a part of Stephane Dion’s thinking when he agreed to withdraw the Lib candidate in the Nova Scotia riding May is contesting.
But there’s more. And my comments come from an understanding of May and the Greens gleaned during an intensive few months when she courted me with vigour – trying to turn me green after Stephen Harper discovered I was over the top.
Elizabeth is obsessed with these debates. She stated clearly during our long talks 18 months ago that “standing with the suits” is her only real goal in this political game. She knows she will not win a seat. She’s realistic about her party, too. It could double its popular vote, from 6% to 12%, and still not elect an MP, since it has no workers, no organization, no discipline and no way to concentrate votes within a few ridings.
The Green Party, actually, is not really a party, but more of a movement. Elizabeth is a spokesperson, not a leader with the power to make things happen. Instead, an unwieldy and decidedly unpolitical council makes operational decisions, the entire organization is desperately short of cash and, while I viewed it, atrociously run.
This is not to be critical of her or the Greens, but to make a point. Right now, the party is Elizabeth. It is a none-of-the-above alternative for a whack of voters who don’t like the Harper Cons and don’t want the Libs out of the penalty box yet. The probability is, after October 14th, there will be no Green MPs – or certainly not enough to gain official party status or run the country. But if the May forces manage to score 12% of the vote, that’ll come right off support for other parties and could seriously affect the overall outcome.
So, should she be in the debate? Her argument is since the Greens now have an MP (Blair Wilson, from BC, who ran afoul of Elections Canada and was punted by Dion), and will run candidates nationally, she has to be included. The official Dion position is yes. The official Harper position is no. The final decision will be that of the consortium of broadcasters who put on the gig.
But this final thought: If Elizabeth gets to debate, it will be for the benefit of Elizabeth. If, along the way, she picks up more votes for the riskless Green option, it could be at the expense of the Libs. And wouldn’t it be ironic if those people voting Green to send a signal about the environment end up re-electing the man who couldn’t care less?
Back in 1993, I sought re-election as a Progressive Conservative, and faced a swarming Reform Party who thought the PCs weren’t right wing enough. So, they managed to split the vote, and a Liberal replaced me – for the next 13 years.
255 comments ↓
Agreed!
Wilson’s motive to join the Greens is clearly revenge against the Liberals for dumping him.
May’s motive for accepting Wilson is clearly political opportunism and self promotion,something she learned well from her teenage crush/mentor Bill Clinton.
The Greens should elect a member before being allowed into any type of national debate.
The debates are already a joke with 4 leaders, 5 will just make it worse.
On a side note, better hope this poll got it wrong.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080901/strategic_counsel_080901/20080901
May could be helpful if she takes on the role that the Vice-President candidate in the USA usually does: That of attack dog; particularly in the debate, if she attacks Harper forcefully and snaps at Layton a few times for his stupidity, could be a net benefit for the Libs and Greens. (oh, and I wouldn’t count her out so quickly, she might have a shot at that seat).
What will be the most frustrating about this election, is that while nearly 70% of the electorate are progressive minded, and only about 30% are these right wing Rovian ideologues, that 30% might still be enough to give Harper a majority, because the sane progressive vote will actually be split 4 ways. Be sure to drive this point home, particularly with NDP voters. They are hoping one day to replace the Libs as the official opposition, but in the meantime the country would be devastated by conservative policies.
I’ll think a whole lot less of Dion if he agrees to participate in a national debate where Layton is included but May is not.
Anyone seen the G & M Strategic Counse poll out today? Not good for Liberals.
My son is voting green because he says they don’t have a chance of getting elected. Wonder how many more think that way?
Harpers Green Shift tax smear
The link below is one of the best links I could find online explaining the issues, pros/cons of Canada’s tarsands where the Green Shift tax effects corporate profits the most.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3839
A quick clip:
“The oil sand industry is one of the major GHG emitters in Canada and the entire process approximately doubles to triples the amount of CO2 released per barrel of petroleum used compared to conventional extraction. The mining process emits about 35 kg CO2 equivalent/barrel, and the upgrading process 45 kg CO2 equivalent/barrel, and the SAGD process 55 kg CO2 equivalent/barrel, (Bramley et al. 2005).
Assuming Bramley’s numbers are accurate, the numbers suggest (and I asked this question many a time with no Con takers) that the tarsands C02 footprint per barrel of oil produced is 135 kgs of C02 per barrel of oil, or 14.81 B0E production per tonne of C02 emissions. If the mining excavation process carbon footprint is excluded, each barrel of oil produces 100 kg of C02 per barrel of oil or 20 barrels of oil per tonne.
So there we have it, nice and neat! For every 20 barrels of oil produced in the tarsands, we have 1 tonne of C02 emmissions as a GHG byproduct.
Here’s my point. In January of 2006, gas sold at the pumps for .98 to 1.02 – 1.03 per litre at the pumps nation wide. Today, the price of gas is 40% higher under Stephen Harper’s careful watch. In the summer, Stephen Harper went to great lengths to sell to the public that the price of gas would go up 40% if Dion won the election and the Green Shift was implimented.
Now… I ask you… how can a Green Shift $40 dollar tax on a tonne of carbon that puts a carbon tax cost of .65 cents to $1.30 per conventional barrel of oil produced, to $2.00 per barrel of oil produced at the tarsands on a BOE priced at $100 bucks a barrel (a 2% rise in cost of production) create Harper’s claimed 40% rise at the pumps?!?!?!?!!!!
$40 bucks per tonne of C02 means a $2.00 per barrel tax on tarsands refiners (priced at $100 bucks per barrel). How does an incremental tax from $10 bucks the first year to $40 bucks a tonne of C02 translate into a 40% rise in gas prices?
How stupid does Harper think Canadians are? Oh, one in 13 are illiterate, maybe, but for the rest of us! How assininely dullard does Harper believe Canadians really are? Does Harper actually believe that gas having rised at the pumps close to 40% under his watch, will suddenly rise another 40% from a $2 dollar tax on refined tarsands crude (priced at $100 bucks a barrel 4 years from now. Oh. And by the way, that $2 dollars a barrel is fixed at $2 bucks regardless of the price of a barrel of oil so if it climbs above $100 bucks a barrel to $150 a barrel, its still two bucks and the perentage drops to less than 2%) or a $1 dollar tax or less tax on refined conventional crude? In lamens terms, how can gas go up 40% at the pumps from a 2% taxation on refined tarsands crude or 1% on conventional crude or less (and again the tax percentage drops as the price rises above $100 a barrel)?
How friggin dumb does Harper believe Canadians truly are?
Now… if refineries can produce 20 barrels of oil per tonne of carbon emmissions which costs them $40 bucks a tonne 4 years from now, I’d say they got a pretty sweet deal for decades of polluting and a chance to clean up their own act at their discretion… Why? It will only cost them 2 bucks a barrel from such a Green Shift carbon tax once fully kicked in and there is no refinery dirtier than the tarsands refineries when it comes to energy inputs vs outputs in the oilpatch so the tax is very specific, being more costly to the tarsands than anywhere else including the oil and gas sector at most other levels.
The Green Shift taxes refineries that are without at doubt, the biggest polluters of large C02 emissions where C02 sequestering makes huge sense and a 2 buck a barrel tax can be shaved down to as much as a dollar a barrel with an honest effort to capture C02 and thats not the only treasure behind a cleanup. If Canadians can successfully clean up their act, they will in reality leave a model exemplar for the world to follow (mind you, I believe Norway already has that working model).
And one thing can change everything so far discussed. The world including the oil industry treats C02 as though its a bad thing… but when it comes to the oil recovery of depleted wells, its got value. We could be talking as much as 10% oil recovery from depleted wells with the use of C02.
Why is there so much resistance to change? Why is the oil lobby lobbying so hard (especially through Harper, he sold his ass to U.S. multi’s, especially big oil a long time ago)? In a word, a new $1 to $2 dollar tax and/or the need for new capital raised to clean up their polluting ways will cost them money and human resources and these greeders are far greedier and cheaper and far more polluting than most of us think and like the dinosaur, simply won’t change their ways. Its still about the next quartery, nothing changes.
So who should we believe, … the guy (Harper) who watched gas at the pumps rise 40% under his watch who states that a $2 dollar tax per B0E will create a 40% rise at the pumps? (cough, hack, choke) Or the guy (Dion) who says big polluters have to clean up their act, a tax on carbon to the tune of $2 bucks a barrel will provide the incentive, the revenues will be turned back to the people directly in this nation and Shiela Fraser can monitor it freely to insure that this, in fact, does happen and we will all be better off (except oil corps, they’ll have to fork over $2 bucks a barrel in gross profit and/or clean up their act to shave the tax down to a $buck a barrel)
Again, who do you believe? The guy who sold his butt to corps decades ago? Or the guy who sold his buns to the people of this great land decades ago, a true servant of this nation…
Who do you believe? The corporate lobbyist? Or the sociologist. Do you believe a 5 year president of the National Citizens Coalition (Harper), a group that donated $50 grand to Harpers election campaign in 93′, a group that exists solely for U.S. multinationals to increase market share of any and all of Canada’s economic sectors protected or otherwise? The NCC agenda can be found right here and unsurprisingly, its Harpers agenda where nothing has changed. Fact is… Harper never gave up his old job as a U.S. corporate multinational and the proof is in this link:
http://nationalcitizens.ca/cgi-bin/oms.cgi?rm=show_category&cid=1
And here:
http://nationalcitizens.ca/cgi-bin/oms.cgi?rm=show_product&pid=2
And most definitely here!:
http://nationalcitizens.ca/doc_bin/agenda_canada.pdf
What is Harpers affiliation? Right here but it goes back to the 80′s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Citizens_Coalition
This is likely to become a daily mantra chant of mine from here on in because people can understand a simplified 2 dollar tax on a $100 dollar tarsands refined barrel. They can also understand a 2 dollar fixed tax that doesn’t change if the price of a barrel of oil rises to $150 a barrel. The Greens themselves want an immediate tax of $50 bucks a tonne and are accurately pricing their tax at $2.50 a barrel. People can quickly understand that oil sands producers are making big $$$ and can afford this without some BS 40% jacked price at the pumps claim by a misfit liar who blatantly serves self interests outside of this nation before his own.
Still shaking my head with this intel… please, there must be a dimwitted Harper party member (true Conservatives were chased out of there long ago) out there who can tell me why Harper believes gas will go up a whopping 40% because of a 2 dollar a barrel federal tax at the refinery level. How does a 2% increase… even a 3% increase on a $100 dollar barrel of oil equate to a 40% increase of gas at the pumps?
Man oh man, can Harper tell lies.
Is the price of energy what Harper is seeking a mandate on? A 2 buck a barrel federal royalty kicked back to ordinary Canadians is not as good as his do nothing, watch the environment tank and damage Canada’s international relations is a better plan, Canada is just another extention of U.S. foreign policy, is this the reason why Harper seeks his mandate?
God, can Harper tell lies.
Is it realistic for them to extend this coalition, with neither party running candidates in the same riding? Let the greens have a seat or three in exchange for not running candidates in the most competitive ridings.
On the other hand, since Dion’s flagship promise is the green shift, maybe that will convince would-be green party supporters to vote Liberal. (They must realise that Dion has more of a shot at becoming PM than Elisabeth May does.)
If we can have thirty or forty Quebec separatists sitting there, then why the hell not have a few MPs who are passionate about the planet?
No problem as long as they are democratically elected.
One thing that is refreshing about the Bloc, is that they actually take a stand on the issues instead of the usual pandering…
The green party is a waste of space. If the country was serious about climate change then she would have an effective voice. But let us remember that the majority of people aren’t prepared to give up their SUV’s, big homes, vacations etc., to save the world.
She should go away quietly and let all those green voters vote for some viable alternative.
By Bocanut on 09.01.08 11:27 pm
“Wilson’s motive to join the Greens is clearly revenge against the Liberals for dumping him.” – Bocanut
No, slowpoke. Its to try to keep his seat.
“May’s motive for accepting Wilson is clearly political opportunism and self promotion,something she learned well from her teenage crush/mentor Bill Clinton.” – Bocanut
And after an 8 month investigation by elections Canada that exhonerated Blair Wilson, you wouldn’t do the same thing in her shoes? (hypocrite)
Blair Wilson had other issues, true, mainly accusations by his own inlaws of wrong doing with investments gone bad councilled by Blair Wilson. Who’s telling the truth? The Libs couldn’t take the chances with the publicity if he wasn’t and knowing the investigation by Elections Canada would run the high probability of running past an election call, the Libs dumped him.
Can the Greens take a chance on Blair? Well, they had 8 long months to find out whether or not Blair was telling the truth at least, from elections Canada’s point of view. Time was not on the Liberals side but it was for the Greens and are his inlaws right or wrong?
Fact is, we still don’t know but one thing is for sure. Blair Wilson still has a career to fight for and as a man trying to save face with whatever truth unfolds, Blair has found a way to do it but he still has some major explaining to do.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2008/07/20/bc-mp-blair-wilson.html
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/national/080720/n072030A.html
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/03/13/motion-confidence.html
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/12/23/bc-wilson.html
“The Greens should elect a member before being allowed into any type of national debate.” – Bocanut
Its simple, slowpoke. Her party is being represented in the commons whether Blair was elected as a Green or not and she, as the parties leader, has a legal and democratic right to represent her party in the leadership debates.
To seriously think as the above halfbreed tropical fruit does that a nation who’s given double digit support through the entire year last year doesn’t have a right to democratically represent her national support on this basis alone is, quite frankly, to not think at all.
I remember the last Ontario provincial election. I was all prepared to vote Liberal even though I thought the local candidate was a bit of a dick. But then, one day before the vote, I received a flyer that looked for all the world to be from the NDP. It was orange, it had a picture of Howard Hampton on the front, and it said, “A vote him… [open it up] … will get you this!” – right below a picture of John Tory.
It was from the Liberals – specifically the local candidate. The next day, I voted Green.
Keep in mind, this was an election where the Liberals pretty much had a lock provincially and a riding where the incumbent was PC, so it wasn’t exactly a risky manoeuvre strategy-wise. Still, the Liberal candidate ended up losing by a shockingly slim margin – slim enough that I like to take personal credit for his loss.
The moral of the story is, people are not stupid. Well, ok, a lot of them are stupid, but the ones who are smart enough to even consider placing a strategic vote are smart enough to do it only when absolutely necessary and to get REALLY TICKED OFF if someone even suggests they place a strategic vote. Especially if that someone is from the party that stands to gain.
Back off, man.
Of course she should be in the debate. And your *warning* is duly noted, something many of us have already thought about.
More important at the moment, go read this.
http://thevanitypress.blogspot.com/2008/09/lawyers-journalists-arrested-at-rnc.html
They are our neighbours, they are the people Harpo imitates, and THAT is what is coming here if Canada is dumb enough to let that ideological thug get another minority. You expect us the voters to be partisan, yet our country is at stake and we hear nothing of coalitions to STOP it from happening.
The many examples of havoc from vote-splitting are symptoms of our terrible first past the post. Voting against a party is not what elections should be about, and obscures the true desires of the majority by sowing fear like you are doing here.
Would you support electoral reform (and execute it properly, unlike the recent Ontario referendum) so the vote splitting you denounce would cease to be such a major issue?
While many would prefer strategic voting to eliminate Harper, this does not justify not allowing Elizabeth May a fair chance to debate as leader of the Green Party. She represents close to a million Canadians and No One should be afraid to let her speak.
In the last election the Green party interested me because they were based on my old pc party in its policies with the inclusion of a green agenda. Most of that pc vote swung to Harper and the greens with only a small portion to the Liberals.
There will be a big block of us pc voters up for grabs this time around including those who are not happy with Harper, those who parked with the greens and those who simply didn’t vote. Unless Elizabeth pushes the rest of her parties agenda it will be tough to get much of the PC vote. If she wanted to get rid of Harper then all she has to do is endorse the green shift as a good starting point while pushing her more draconian plan. When voters compare the two most will chose your plan as being easier to take on their pocket book.
The silence from Liberals when it comes to comparing the various environmental plans is deafining! You guys are going to get vocal and put Harper on the defensive even just once aren’t you?
Dion took her seriously enough to give up running a Liberal candidate in her riding, to not want her in the debates when she has a MP in the House seems rather hypocritical doesn’t it?
Harper is counting on the vote splits. 2009 is another election. Do you really think that if he’s not punished during this election he won’t be in the next? That’s a lot of money the Conservatives are wasting. Money that could have been used to fund social programs, arts, food inspections and the environment.
jmho
Mr.Turner
Maybe you can help,doesn’t take about 12 Mps in the house before a political party is recognized as such?
No way should she be allowed at the debate. One MP, elected or not, should not be enough to be allowed at the debate or you would have to let every independent as well. Offical party status should be required.
Oh hell Duffy’s back tomorrow, misinforming Canadians mouth byte by mouth byte.
I don’t care how magnanimous or charitable you describe Lizzy Mae or the Green Party, a vote for them is a vote wasted when it is critical that we reclaim Canada from extremists and zealots. Every vote for the Green Party is one less vote Harper et al need to get to retain power. As for the debate, like you say, the host(s) hold the keys, the tickets, and call the shots.
If Lizzy Mae wants to make an impact, she needs to be inside either the Liberal or NDP Parties and sell her case to them. If she has what it takes, then show it to the membership and earn the mantle. For the vast great unwashed, she is an unknown and untested. This is not the time for experiments given the World recession beginning and the particular set of active military provocations now happening, Iran, Georgia, Pakistan, Sudan, Afganistan, etc. [there are others not so obvius yet, too]
One issue parties and leaders do not cut it.
And now we hear that 49% of Canadians think the country is heading in the right direction?
The Harper Cons are flirting with majority numbers. I am in shock and disbelief that there is that much apathy and disinformation out there that people are just not clueing in to the trail of broken promises and treachery this so called Con Party government has given us for the past two years?
Right Direction? Strong Leader? -Who is that masked man? What happened to my Canada?
And the big shocker is that Southern Ontario is the cause for the sudden rise in Harper’s popularity. What are these people smokin? Didn’t Dim Jim and Harpo kill all the manufacturing jobs for these people? So now they want to re-elect them? I thought Alberta was delusional – Is that the answer now to get elected in Canada you just feed us all a bunch of B.S. and keep us in the dark like the good little mushrooms we seem to be.
Pathetic!
The green leader has forest gump. ugh!
Save the Camels!
When they Win one seat they deserve a seat at the debates.
She should be spending her time advancing STV, I would support that 100%
Here is a link to a good explanation, of STV, BC style.
http://citizensassembly.bc.ca/resources/flash/bc-stv-full.swf
When they Win one seat they deserve a seat at the debates.
She should be spending her time advancing STV, I would support that 100%
Here is a link to STV, BC style.
http://www.bc-stv.ca/
I still say the Greens should merge with the Liberals, so as to provide a potential tour de force against Harper’s CONS.
Having said that, the reality as pointed out is without question.
Vote Liberal, and
Take Back Canada!
This kind of thing makes me crazy:
Conservatives Most Trusted on Jobs and the Economy and the War in Afghanisgtan
http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-S08-T311.pdf
I wish there was a Canadian version of this:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v172/sadkitty/Live%20Journal/LJ%20Post%20Images/fiscal.jpg
I’m sorry, I like Elizabeth May – but she sure is messing up her party. It seems to be all about her.
Debate – why are Harper and Layton “afraid” to debate her? The MP situation, to me, shows how opportunistic she is…doesn’t go down well with me. Sorry Lizzie, you’ve lost my respect.
Garth, you are absolutely right about the irony of voting Green. It is also the irony of voting for the NDP in many ridings in Canada. Either way, a vote for these two parties allows Harper to win seats. This is EXACTLY why people REALLY need to consider if they want Harper back in office.
The real issue in this election is whether people want Harper back in office or not. If they do, then they should vote Conservative. If they don’t then they should vote Liberal. A vote for the Greens will help elect a Conservative. And, in the vast majority of ridings a vote for the NDP will help elect a Conservative. Harper knows this, and Flanagan’s book confirms this fact as well.
I fear for the future of this great country if there is another Harper Conservative government. I hope the other 64% of voters who didn’t vote Conservative in the last election feel the same way – and as a result cast their ballots strategically and elect a Dion Liberal government.
TS
strategicvoting@yahoo.ca
For more information on how you can help defeat the Harper Conservatives by casting your ballot on a strategic basis email me at strategicvoting@yahoo.ca and indicate whether you want a BC, Prairie, Ontario, Quebec or Maritime riding assessment.
But who started this covenant with the Greens that no one will bring an opponent if the other has already fielded its candidate? It was Dion. Now, it has been proven during the by-elections that in a contest between the Cons and Libs, it is the Greens who benefit. Yet it is the Libs who have the most comprehensive and viable approach to environment.
Will Dion break his promise to May? What will be the repercussion on the Libs if Dion chooses to field candidates against the Greens? Now that election is most imminent, you have to approach this covenant with the party’s interests in mind. If the Liberals have the Green Shift as its platform, why still have to deal with the Green Party? Unless, the Liberals are not too confident with their Green Shift. If Dion’s justification from avoiding to defeat the Conservatives at the House of Commons is to be sure to win during the next elections, will he now admit that his covenant does not serve the greater interest of the party and instead will help in its defeat?
Will May be included in the debate because she got Blair Wilson? Now, should’t it be Blair Wilson who should debate and not May?
Why did John Kerry lost during the 2004 elections? It was because of Ralph Nader. Will Dion admit that May may work like Ralph Nader in the next federal elections? Dion may remember that on the matter of appeal to voters, he is less liked than Harper? If he is also less liked than May, then surely the votes will go to the Greens?
I agree with your Garth, at this time, when it is the platform of the party that is carrying the fight, let it not be diverted to the status of comparison among leaders. Let us admit it, Dion, for all his honesty and reputation for truth, is not inspiring. If he is still compared with May, he may bring down the party’s popularity.
But, Stephane Dion is pleased that he silenced one of his Liberal ridings in Nova Scotia to let Elizabeth May run against the Conservatives and NDP.
Is there a back room deal going on to merge the Greens and the Liberals?
You say May being in the debates will be for May, but I say it will be for the things she believes in, particularly the environment. She also sees the harm Harper is doing and can do.
She will also expose Layton’s deception on this — that one should wait until one can implement a cap and trade and that cap and trade doesn’t cost people.
Actually the US Congressional Budget Office has concluded that cap and trade will end up costing even more than a carbon tax for a set amount of reduction in emissions. They have worked on ideas to try to make cap and trade more similar to a carbon tax, for the simple reason that in the US one cannot mention the word tax. But you won’t get the truth on this from Layton or Harper.
Garth, checked in first with the G&M site and it’s stated already, Polls polls and more polls…..I hope this site does not turn out that. Dion is an underdog and will have to fight on two fronts the Harper controlled media and the Harper fed pollsters…tough sledding for sure.
Garth,
You outline two scenarios where vote splitting did and could produce an election result contrary to the majority wish in a riding(s). This makes the case for a transferable ballot which would provide a result more in keeping with the wishes of the majority.
It would also let people vote their clear first preference, instead of casting votes against a possible bad result, which is the approach you are now advocating.
Of course, she should be allowed in the debate, wonder why the CPC is so afraid of open debate. Guess it is just part of their philosophy to keep everything secret. God forbid the light of day should fall on their activities, such as, the income trust explanation, 18 pages blacked out, the “in & out” scheme, where the outcome would have been defrauding the taxpayers, thanks to Elections Canada for being on the job and outing this scheme. Then the “Cadman” vote buying attempt which Stevie Wonder is trying to hold up in the courts…Nah…the CPC doesn’t want anyone in the debates, in fact, I am surprised they have cancelled them saying the opposition isn’t going to co-operate. Maybe they will issue a 200 page booklet to the Opposition leaders on question they can and cannot ask…
By Bocanut on 09.01.08 11:27 pm
Why would Harper be so afraid of May?
He could just do what he did last time, lie out his plan….
STEPHEN HARPER – LIAR
Tells Income Trust holders and prospective buyers his government will never tax trusts like those Liberals proposed (and rejected)…
Once elected…the Halloween massacre….broken promise!
IS THAT THE LEADER CANADIANS WANT?
SAY NO TO LIAR HARPER!
Garth
Since this is my riding I have a personal interest in the outcome.
My knowledge of Blair is rumour and facts.
Rumour absolutely, not my words Mr. Wilson, but a quote from a local Conservative small businessman “ He’s a crook” hardly evidence.
This for me is not about rumour but fact and he joining the Green Party makes Wilson a desperate kind of politician and Liz May opportunistic.
The battle of the riding is always West Vancouver and it’s noveau riche petigree of mainlanders. The greener side of the riding is the Sunshine Coast and Sea to Sky Country is often orange.
Take note this has always been a split vote riding by design. If Liz gets her way she could do damage to both Harper and Layton. Afterall, it’s Layton who attacks Dion rather than Harper on the environment.
I’m not so sure Liz would hurt M. Dion but boy I think she would expose Mr. Harper.
Well, nothing against the Libs, but they DID have 13 years to change this VERY faulty electoral system… more Green should NEVER benefit the nuckle heads on the right… that has nothing to do with democracy!
Let her in. That way she can be Dions attack dog, kind of like what Jack Layton does for Harper.He attacks Dion from the left, while Harper goes for the right.
The cons are hyprocrites,liars and cheats. This is common knowledge among Canadians.
Just read their last election platform and find the lies.
http://bp1.blogger.com/_qDCerXrp15g/SI6bVF5J7HI/AAAAAAAAAZ4/_SskuqIKNTU/s1600-h/polling.bmp
I, for one, would like to see May in the debates. She has a right to now as far as I’m concerned. Yes, it would have been better if the 1st Green MP had been elected but that not being the case the Green’s have a foot in the door – even though it may not last long.
Whether she’s a good debater or not would remain to be seen. But it could be helpful for Dion & the Libs if she comes off a little “whacky” in the way she presents her views which would highlight Dion’s expertise in all areas.
And it has always annoyed me to see Duceppe in the debates as he represents only one province. One he wants to separate from the rest of Canada. He doesn’t care about the country as a whole. The Greens do have candidates right across the nation & should have a voice that is heard by all.
As a member of the Green Party of Canada I have to disagree with your assessment of Elizabeth May. Elizabeth’s charm, intelligence and drive has taken the party to support of over 1,000,000 people in Canada.
To not let her speak would be a travesty.
One has to wonder if you ever thought that there would be a Green MP and wonder if you really are missing being that historically significant first MP? Ms May has the support of the Green Party of Canada as was shown by the over 300 people that showed up at the campaign office of Mike Nagy in Guelph on Sunday to meet Blair Wilson after just an email message. I can tell you when word reached the campaign office on saturday people were dancing in the steerts.
This is a party that is behind Ms may 100%
“But if the May forces manage to score 12% of the vote, that’ll come right off support for other parties and could seriously affect the overall outcome.”
Blame our voting system, not the Green party. There are alternatives…
Garth,
That was by far your most self-serving topic todate. Congrats.
While I agree with your comments, to a point, I also am still unsold on Dion’s Green Shift Plan.
In fact, I have yet to see a logical, sound, long term plan from either of the two major parties that does what MUST be done…create a SUSTAINABLE economy.
They both have one foot in Hell and one foot in heaven, and it is just more of the same old, same old BS to me.
Observing it all I think BOTH the Cons and the Libs care far more about POWER than Canada.
As to an election, it is a complete and unnecessary WASTE of taxpayer’s money and both parties should be sent to the penalty box.
I am sick and tired of being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils, neither of which is exhibiting leadership for CANADA, just themselves.
There is my honest and bottom line opinion of all this BS. Make Harper cooperate, hold him to the very law he wanted and got, and all of you need to grow up and act like mature adults and real Canadians. The result of your failure will bring in the same as the last 8 years the U.S. has had.
Oh, and YES, Elizabeth May DESERVES to be in the debates. The Good Old Boy’s Club is as out of touch as McCain and his geriatric followers. I think both Harper and Dion are scared of Elizabeth May being in the debate because she will rip the facade off both their schemes.
It’s for damn sure the MSM, aka, TFKN’s of the Establishment, don’t want to allow her to rock their comfy little boat.
Personally, I hope she beats Peter MacKay and gives all of you Hell in the HoC…you need it.
The sad thing to me is that many Canadians so not realize how fortunate we are to have four political parties. In fact, a functional Parliament would take the best ideas from each and run this country for the people’s benefit, and that means the individual. In the U.S. they only have two parties and the ideologies have been as stale as 40 year old bread for a long time.
BTW, I know it can work because I have participated in such political actions. The end result was something the main stream politicians cannot find the courage to believe in. A good idea is a good idea regardless of where it comes from. That is TRUE democracy. You should try it sometime.
Moral? Careful what you wish for.
posted by Garth Turner on 09.01.08 @ 11:03 pm
I could not have said it better myself. Right out of the starting gate you are calling for strategic voting. I think Jennifer Smiths post is perfect.
On another note I saw Ignatieff interviewed on Question Period and I must say he looked like a man getting ready to assume the leadership role of the Liberal party after this election. He was very subdued and you could almost see the glee knowing that Dion is going to be toast after the next vote.
WRONG Garth. The Greens have volunteers and support as well as funding just like the rest of the parties, maybe not as much as the CONs though but then the Liberals don’t have as much as the CONS either.
You sound scared that the Greens will steal votes from the Libs and you are right! We would likely vote Lib if not for the Greens and this will probably mean HARPO is back in…that part is too bad BUT we if we are gonna vote for an MP who will represent US who do we vote for?
1. CONS who don’t represent their constituents.
2. LIBS who sit, abstain, walk out thus don’t represent their constituents.
3. Greens who won’t have an MP to represent their constituents.
I’ll call it a draw with any of the three choices and stick with morals and vote GREEN!
Hey, vote however you want. Just understand the consequences. — Garth
Elizabeth May always reminds me of The Cookie Monster. She has the big Googley eyes and sudden facial contortion expressions that the Muppet has. She’s fun for about 5 minutes and then, well time to move on. She’s had her 5 minutes, time to move on.
Dion would do well to stop pandering to her whims, all he does with this is 1: Make himself look weak and 2: Syphon votes away from the Liberals when in fact he should be doing the opposite and trying to take votes from the Greens and Dippers.
Can’t believe the narrow minded posters that posit this is a them (cons) vs us (libs). This is democracy which means individuals vote for who they choose. I choose green.
Garth you sound like a con again. I really like such and such but this is why they are bad for you.
The green party is NOT Elizabeth May, nor was it Jim Harris when he was leader. Open your eyes and ears. If I’m gonna throw my vote away at least I do it knowing I did the right thing even if I can’t win. Morals was something I thought you touted.
‘Throwing your vote away’ – so, what’s your purpose? Supporting a climate change strategy that might actually get done, or poking the bear? Your vote is precious. — Garth
One seat – whether earned or not – does not a party make. Flash of the obvious: May is smart and a great debater, but she does not yet have a place in prime time politics, no matter how smart, silver-tongued and sincere she may be.
I saw that poll – then saw it was from the Strategic Council (CPC polling companuy). I wouldn’t get to worked up.
Yesterday, I was at a friend’s house, with the kids. We enjoyed a lovely “last day before school” at the pool – and somehow the conversation turned to politics.
I was shocked when our friends said – “I won’t be tricked into voting Reform this time around.” – completely unprompted.
I really can’t see Harper getting a majority.
And if they do – then perhaps we deserve it. I would just hate to see people learn the hard way.
I too like Elizabeth May but Blair Wilson makes me feel uncomfortable, I don’t quite trust the man.
Unfortunately Elizabeth had to make this tough decision and I do hope she will be included in any debates.
I’m not happy with Dion’s decision to let her run in McKay’s riding with no Liberal in the running although I suppose this was to avoid splitting the votes in McKay’s favour? I just don’t think Elizabeth is a strong enough candidate to run against McKay in place of a Lib.
@ DancingSamurai – Agreed!
The fact that in a system as it stands, votes for one left-party can hurt another(and the Greens are very much a Party, Garth!) has nothing to do with the notion, that a Green-Party leader ought to be part of the TV-debate.
According to my oppinion, confusing these two items would be a huge step back.
I know that you (Garth) support an electoral reform. Back in October I was very pleased to read your post regarding that topic. So, I feel you’re a person who strives towards more democracy.
More democracy, however, also includes a broader access to information for voters. Hence the voter needs to be ‘impacted’, if you will, by all national parties in order to make a balanced decision. And think about it: Stalling Elizabeth’s attempt to ‘get in’ stalls electoral reform progress at last.
Furthermore, the Greens are what they are because the have never had a real stage (debate/parliament) to sell themselfes. I’m pretty sure that if we would have had an electoral system like (for instance) Germany 10 years ago, they would stand in a much different light today – financially too.
To conclude: If you (Garth) would like the Green Party to hover listlessly for another 10 years, then do whatever you must to keep them out of this debate (as it appears this is what you want). If on the other hand you want the Greens to develop and become bigger, then help them to get a stage just like your boss does.
I can understand that you want your party to win this election. I can also understand that there’s a prospect of many potential Lib-votes going down the “Green drain”, preventing the desired victory.
Yet, you can’t forget who’s on your side and who’s not. The Greens are not your preditor. Therefore you shouldn’t put them down as you did above (almost read a bit like all that Con-garbage about the Libs to be honest).
The way to go is to win the election side by side and subsequently make for a better (vote-splitt-less) system as government… the only upright way – there is no other.
Thanks
We have spent the past number of elections voting on the basis of holding our noses and supporting one of the two establishment parties to get rid of the other. When will this end? Will we move further and further into a two party oligarchy?
We desperately need to return to a more democratic system and while I would oppose proportional representation I would support the concept of a preferential ballot.
I agree. — Garth
From CAITI Blog:
If only Stephen Harper were a straight up guy
You’ve probably already seen the Stephen Harper TV ads that proclaim
“Stephen Harper is a straight up guy. He knows where he stands”
If Stephen Harper is such a straight up guy, then why did his party attempt to bribe Chuck Cadman?
If Stephen Harper is such a straight up guy, then why the taxpayer scam known as the In and Out scandal?
If Stephen Harper is such a straight up guy, then why the 200 page manual on how to obstruct Parliament?
Furthermore, it’s nice that Stephen Harper “knows where he stands”.
That said, would it be asking too much if he could please let us know where he stands…..BEFORE the fact and not AFTER the fact, this time around?
Did Harper know where he stood when he promised he would never raid seniors nest eggs? We only learned where he really stood when it was too late. $35 billion too late
Did Harper know where he stood when he promised he would commit himself to fixed election dates? We only learned where he really stood when it was too late. 4 By-elections too late
Did Harper know where he stood when he promised better consumer protection? We only learned where he really stood when it was too late. 12 Listeriosis deaths too late
The only thing “straight” about Stephen Harper is his ability to lie with a straight face.
Harper is anything but a straight up guy. It’s high time that Canadians let Harper know where we stand. We stand for democracy and good government. Harper stands for anything but.
There is always a risk of vote splitting, but blame the electoral system.
As I understand it, the GPC concentrates its efforts on specific ridings where its chances of winning are highest, usually where there is most vote splitting in the first place.
That said, in the riding of Gatineau, the vote-splitting and (rather unexplainable) significant voter apathy means there is this rather big chunk of votes that went to the CONs, even though the candidate had absolutely no political experience and had less professional experience than me (even though he was a ‘baby’ and still a few years older than me) (and trust me, there cannot be that many extremely rich ppl in this city; I hear of people who would vote CPC on the only basis that ‘gas prices would go down’!).
Scaring the electorate about vote-splitting worked marvelously for Chrétien’s 3rd majority in 2000, but it is still quite dishonest. This time, let’s make it about ideas. There is no shortage of them, and it’s clear the CONs are way off when it comes to ideas and keeping promises.
Let’s get Ms. May in the debates, just like reform and NDP were invited to them even when they weren’t official parties. Let the electorate and EC shoulder the blame if, Gawd forbids, the CPC gets a majority.
“Can’t believe the narrow minded posters that posit this is a them (cons) vs us (libs). This is democracy which means individuals vote for who they choose. I choose green.
Garth you sound like a con again. I really like such and such but this is why they are bad for you.
The green party is NOT Elizabeth May, nor was it Jim Harris when he was leader. Open your eyes and ears. If I’m gonna throw my vote away at least I do it knowing I did the right thing even if I can’t win. Morals was something I thought you touted.
‘Throwing your vote away’ – so, what’s your purpose? Supporting a climate change strategy that might actually get done, or poking the bear? Your vote is precious. — Garth
By dj on 09.02.08 8:48 am ”
What is my purpose you ask. Well my choices are to vote for someone who doesn’t represent me in the HoC, whether that is the CONs who dictate, the Libs who abstain/sit/walkout, or the Greens who won’t get a seat…or to not vote at all. I guess with all those choices one is just throwing away their vote, right?
The CONS have lied once voted in, the Libs have lied once voted in, ….but hey the greens haven’t lied because they haven’t been voted in. Hmmmm.
I’ll state my political allegiances. Philosophically, I support the Greens and the Libs – the Center parties.
Still, over the course of my voting life, for various reasons, some less than noble – like strategic voting – I’ve voted NDP and PC as well. Basically, I’m not a “Party Animal”.
This election will be a disaster for the Liberals and the end of what little representative democracy we have in Canada. Harper wins no matter what the outcome, and he knows it.
He has two unbeatable advantages:
1) Full coffers. The Libs are cash-strapped. Even if Harper only gets another minority government, the Libs will end up deeper in debt or even bankrupt. That will force a leadership review for Dion.
2) Divide and conquer. This will be Harper’s electoral strategy, and it’ll work, thanks to our ever-present(!) undemocratic and unrepresentative FPP (first-past-the-post) electoral system.
In ridings where the progressive vote is 65% and support for Harper’s Reform/Alliance Party is only 35%, the so-called Cons will stand a good chance of winning the seat by “running up the middle”, because the opposing vote will be split between 3-4 other parties. Canadian “democracy” in action!
Of course, the opposition parties could blindside Dear Leader by going to the GG and asking her to bless the formation of a Coalition government. This would have the added benefits of avoiding the expense and irritation of a general election, and making the government actually function again (what a concept!) since the opposition parties have more commonalities than differences. But that would put National Interests above Party Interests…and we can’t have that in Canada.
The democratic deficit has never been addressed by any of the traditional parties…nor is it likely to be addressed by them, because it’s to their political advantage, and that interest is paramount.
So many Canadians are not voting because they know their vote doesn’t count. Also, many of us don’t want to vote for a Party anymore. Can you Garth, and the other 307 MPs GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEADS? Ever wonder why ALL politicians are hated regardless of Party affiliation?
Our Parliamentary system is horribly antiquated; an outdated, unrepresentative voting system, and the inherent uncooperative imperative of patriarchal party politics. What a total turn-off.
Would that we had no parties in Parliament, only MPs, and proportional representation. But it won’t happen.
The Party Animals are too self-interested. In this election:
The Libs want their majority.
The Bloc continues to be myopically focused on Quebec.
The NDP is ideologically imprisoned on the left.
Sadly, you guys can’t put representation above Party. If the only important goal is to have your Party come out on top, what then is the point of electoral representation? And what about the winning Party that will brook no opposition? What then?
Well, that is Harper. The man is a dangerous, anti-democratic sociopath, and he’s poised to destroy the system from within.
Oh, and Liz May. She should be included in the debates. How is MORE democracy and debate a bad thing Garth?
Don’t worry though; the Greens won’t get any seats even though more Canadians will vote for them than ever before. FPP will take care of that!
Finally, all political parties begin as movements. Yes, the Green party is a movement, but in a twist of bitter irony, it also has to organize itself as a party to get anywhere in our wonderful Parliamentary system. Yeah, reality bites.
Keep after Harper and his Neo-Con Market Fundamentalists, Garth!
On a side note, better hope this poll got it wrong.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080901/strategic_counsel_080901/20080901
By Trevor on 09.01.08 11:31 pm
Hi Trevor, no need to worry! Strategic Council has a history of grossly overstating Conservative support. This is also the company the CTV uses for its polls…. so they are always crowing about the Conservatives leading. Since CTV is a Conservative media outlet (with the likes of Duffy and Tabor) this is no surprise.
TS
strategicvoting@yahoo.ca
Literary Review of Canada
Volume 16, Number 7
September 2008
Pages 3-6
http://lrc.reviewcanada.ca/index.php?page=progressivism-s-end
Progressivism’s End
In Obama, both Americans and Canadians can see the promise of something new.
AN ESSAY
by David Eaves and Taylor Owen
“A recent poll found that a substantial majority of Canadians want Barack Obama to be the next U.S. president. More surprisingly, another found that if Obama were the leader of the Liberals or Conservatives in Canada, he would win decisively.
What is clear is that Canadian neo-progressives are not waiting for traditional political representation. Their ideas and approaches are, whenever possible, circumventing political parties and even government — a development these institutions should heed as a wake-up call, if they want to remain relevant in the 21st century. ”
I found the above via eaves.ca
“Several months ago the Literary Review of Canada put out a request for articles about the rise of Obama and what it means for politics in general and Canada specifically. Mine and Taylor’s proposal won out and is the lead essay in this month’s edition of the LRC. Needless to say we are pretty excited.
The essay explores how the Left has been killing progressive politics. Those on the right have always been clear about their disdain for progressivism and their desire to rollback its success. On the left however, an equally strong conservatism has emerged. Fearful that any debate, or worse reform, will threaten successes of the past century many progressives have become anti-change. It is a more subtle conservatism, but it has helped foster a political environment within the left and centre-left that is defined by silence and stagnation.
But change is afoot. A new generation is challenging old assumptions. It is these same people – the neo-progressives – that helped propel Obama to the top of the democratic party. This new generation of progressives could similarly reshape Canadian politics.”
A worthwhile read IMO.
I was shocked when our friends said – “I won’t be tricked into voting Reform this time around.” – completely unprompted.
I really can’t see Harper getting a majority.
And if they do – then perhaps we deserve it. I would just hate to see people learn the hard way.
By Tim N on 09.02.08 8:57 am
I had about the same experience Tim as I sat in my garden last night with my three new neighbours in their early 30′s. Both of them said they would never vote for Harper. I also then filled them in more about Harper they did not know. My hair dresser says Harper gives her the creeps. I can’t see how Harper getting a majority either.
I think those of us who support Stephane Dion and his team need to work our best in this election so he is gone before he has the chance to ruin Canada more.
If he is going to fight this election on leadership, then he has been electioneering for two years with his Dion is not a leader campaign.
………………………………..
Harper is anything but a straight up guy. It’s high time that Canadians let Harper know where we stand. We stand for democracy and good government. Harper stands for anything but.
By Brent Fullard on 09.02.08 9:23 am
Well done Brent.
By Javor Frajkor on 09.02.08 9:37 am
What a great post…thank you…
This might be a good alternative…
I believe it is quite evident that neither the CPC or the LPC are deserving to serve again as the Government of Canada. Since the other parties have little or no hope of forming a government, I would suggest that the party system in Canada is no longer useful to the electorate and would suggest Canadians on mass demand a new form of Government.
That Government could take the form of a Provincially Appointed Government or an elected Independent Government. I have some rough ideas along that line and would suggest we embark on this route if we care at all to see a democratic government that will respect the wishes and will of the constituents. This is necessary as the two main parties in Canada no longer allow representation from the grassroots. When MPs are flown into ridings to run or told how to vote, this destroys basic democracy.
Try for a moment to put aside your partisan choice (whatever that might be) and look at this objectively.
FOR A NEW INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT IN CANADA
Here is the plan…
1. Each Province and/or Territory is allotted one member of parliament based on their percentage of the population of Canada. For example if Alberta has say 18 % of the population, they get 18 seats. (There will be possibly a few more than 100 seats to accommodate those provinces who have .5 % or more or who might have less than 1% of the population)
Each Province or Territory must have at least one seat.
2. Within each Provincial caucus, the members slated to be in the cabinet will be voted in by the elected members.
3. Each Province and Territory will have one member in Cabinet, the four largest Provinces in population two. (Total 16 members)
4. The Prime Minister will be elected by the 16 members of Cabinet and approved by the Parliament as a whole.
5. Funding for elections will be provided by the federal government and will be limited to the minimal amount necessary. (the amount to be determined by Elections Canada)
No individual or corporate donations will be accepted, the penalty for accepting them will be dismissal from Parliament and a by election will be held in that riding within 60 days.
6. Recall from cabinet can be effected by a vote of 75% of Parliament.
7. Recall from Parliament can be effected by a 60% participation in the form of a petition of the MPs riding.
Election Yes but a Fair Election?
What surprises me about the pending federal election is what nobody is talking about.
We know that Stephen Harper as head of the National Citizens Coalition took Elections Canada all the way to the Supreme Court. His argument was that it is unconstitutional to limit third party advertising as it limits free speech – he lost the case in 2004.
So why should Canadians worry about third party advertising?
You remember John Kerry and the Swiftboat campaign funded by (wait for it) T. Bonne Pickens the Texas oil guy.
The next nagging question is will Mr. Harper follow his interpretation or Elections Canada interpretation of national advertising limits? We know Mr. Harper thinks there should be no limits. We know he defied Elections Canada in the 2006 federal election. We know Mr. Harper had no hesitation in using taxpayer money to send wave after wave of partisan flyers across the country for months.
We know he has extensive radio and television ads on how wonderful he is; even before he’s bothered to dissolve Parliament.
So Canadians need to consider this at the polling station – should any political party be allowed to buy an election?
Ms. May mentioned in an interview last week that the reason Mr. Dion and the Liberals were not opposing her in the next election was “leader courtesy” a concept that was also offered and used by Stephen Harper when he was the new leader of the Reform Party and seeking his first seat in the HOC. I guess this is a throwback to the days when politicians were a little more civilized than some we see in parliament today. Ms. May is an intelligent and articulate speaker and would probably skewer Stephen Harper on environmental issues. However I think that in many other areas, the Green Party is far more right wing than the Liberals and if that comes across in the debate, which I am sure it will, many progressive voters could not vote for the Green Party. And I for one, would like to see a smart intelligent woman taking on the “suits”. It won’t change my vote but I think she deserves the chance to represent the million plus voters that support her. I also think that Canadian voters are smart enough to realize that if their preferred party doesn’t stand a chance of forming the government they will “lend” their vote to the party that most closely represents the issues closest to their hearts. Mr. Dion is an honourable man who has supported Ms. May’s wish to speak in the debates and I cannot see him going back on his word for pure political advantage. We’ve seen enough of that in the past two plus years to know this is not the direction we want our great Canadian democracy to go.
By Javor Frajkor on 09.02.08 9:37 am
Sir you have made some very valid points and of course I could add Harper’s plan to switch to electronic voting machines supplied by Republican contractors should he win this one, but that is another horse of different colour. I do however remain hopeful that our younger generation to which the future holds believe in a kinder gentler nation having seen what standing on the side lines has done in recent years with Dubya and Winds of War crew running the show. Only about 5% of us political types pay much attention to real issues and the neo cons know they really only need about 35% of the voting population to win as many do not even show up as they know that they control the foolishness and by doing so help their own personal cause…..and it goes on and on. South of Border Barack Obama has struck a cord and should win as close to 15 million voters are off the pollsters radar and many have made up their mind and are just waiting saying little, so there is hope sir…and it does run eternal.
dj on 09.02.08 9:36 am
Good post.
There is one other consideration here about “wasted votes”. Because of the new public political funding model, your vote has a cash value. If you support the Greens (or any other party) with your vote, you are also supporting them with funding. Even if the Greens don’t an elect an MP (and I still think they could) a strong showing at the ballot box means a stronger Green Party, and vice versa of course.
Political parties are every bit as self-interested as any other corporate entity and now – with this funding model – they are becoming just as short-sighted. They want you to “loan them” a vote while speaking highly of their respect for the Greens (or the NDP) but they know that “borrowed” votes are bleeding the lifeblood from their smaller competitors.
This is why I so often scold people for letting politicians play the “us and them” game. As soon as you start identifying yourself in terms of “us and them” you have defined yourself as a sucker. You’ve been gulled if you think any political party – or any individual politican – has your interest at heart.
well said Garth…. perhaps there will be a ‘Unite the Left’ movement in the next 5 years….
On another note I saw Ignatieff interviewed on Question Period and I must say he looked like a man getting ready to assume the leadership role of the Liberal party after this election. He was very subdued and you could almost see the glee knowing that Dion is going to be toast after the next vote.
By Brian Wilson on 09.02.08 8:31 am
Another great factual post by a CPC supporter, certainly glad you can read his mind and expressions, now could you read Harper’s and tell us how much his regulated environmental plan will cost each Canadian, and how he plans to allevaite the suffering for those on fixed incomes who are already feeling the pinch as it is?
Mr. Turner’s observation about Ms. May running and pulling votes from the Liberals has parallels, and can be history altering for the wrong reasons. There are plausible theories that Ralph Nader is indirectly responsible for the Iraq war.
The argument goes that in 2000, GW Bush beat Al Gore in Florida by 537 votes (out of more than 5.8 million cast), making it the closest presidential election in the state’s history. This gave Bush Florida’s 25 electoral college votes and, with the help of the Supreme Court, the presidency. Nader received almost 100,000 votes in Florida, most of which would have likely been cast for Gore, if Nader had not run.
But Mr. Bush did win, and the rest is sadly, history. The odds are high that after 9/11, Mr. Gore would have gone after Bin Ladin in Afghanistan, but there was absolutely no reason to go to war in Iraq, and he most likely would not have.
So if the Liberals were to lose this election by a margin smaller than the popular vote received by the Greens, Ms. May should be prepared to bear some responsibility for whatever atrocities the Cons perpetrate on us over the next few years.
It seems to me that there is a great deal of confusion as to what constitutes a party. What do you think is required to make a party?
The Green Party, and a number of other parties that do not have representation in Parliament, are registered parties that meet the requirements of the Elections Act. The Green Party is the only one of those parties that receive public funding based on their vote strength. Now that they have an official MP even he was not elected under the party name, he was elected by his riding. He is just as legitimate an MP as David Emerson or any of the other MPs who were elected under one party banner and moved to another party.
Was the BQ allowed in the debates in the election following their break with another party? Was the Reform Party allowed in the debates with one MP?
Are parties nothing more than the leader? If a party exist only to empower one person is that democratic? The consititutions of the new Conservatives and the new Liberal one suggest that is what the parties are all about. Should that be the case?
We do not live in a presidential system. However, our system has evolved in such a way that there are few if any checks on the power of the Prime Minister.
The direction the next election is taking is a referendum on Stephen Harper. That should be a warning to all Canadian voters.
Garth,
It was absolutely ridiculous for Mr. Dion to meet with Harper especially before he drew a line the sand not to meet until September 8th. I was proud of Dion when he didnt take Harper’s call last week, it gave him some room to maneuver. When the bully doesn’t know what the enemy is thinking, they gets intimidated. If the bi-elections dont happen, Dion should blame himself.
Does Dion not realise that Harper will always try to get submission from his opponents, he walked right in to Harper’s land mine.
Harper’s communication crony has already started with degrading comments, like, “Dion doesn’t understand the law….”
I have concluded that Mr. Dion has a naive streak inside him that he is not aware of. Now Harper can say with some credibility that the opposition parties are intransigent as confirmed by his three meetings.
Don’t get me wrong I want Dion to win, I want the green shift to happen and I dont trust Harper to manage the economy but I have to admit, right now, Dion is the underdog.
Daryn
You know what worked in the USA since 2000 was that the PROGRESSIVES joined forces to try to rid the Congress and WH of the NEO Cons and their Enabling NEO Dems which are many. The Progressive blogs in the USA some of which were started by Disgruntled Republicans have worked long and Hard and they are now only seeing some success. It’s the people who will have to start seeing themselves as Progressives and Not just Party Followers. I’m niether Liberal or CON I’m a Progressive Voter who’s leanings are More Left,but there are More Progressives on this Site that lean Right who support Garth because he is and Always was a Progressive Conservative like they themselves. I think it was the Progressive in Garth that the HarperCONS didn’t like. Danny Williams stated way back when that Harper wanted to Rid the CRAP Party of all the Moderates which he has done. The CONS would Best remember that it was the “Progressive” in the Old PC Party that Canadians Voted for Not The CONservative. Stop seeing yourselves as Liberal,Green or NDP and just label yourself Progressive.Dion welcomed Garth into the Party and to me that shows that Dion wants a MORE Progressive Party than what the Old Liberal Party was and I think he needs to convince Liz May to Join Forces with him and If he Wins Make Her Enviro Min. and Reward Garth for his Hard work by making him Finance Minister or Deputy PM for since joining the Liberals Garth has worked Non Stop and a Hell of alot Harder than some Long Time Lib Members.
All that matters to me is that Garth and Dion are Progressives who Represent the Majority of Canadians on the Left and Right that’s why I support Dion and Turner.
COALITION GOVERNMENT???
FYI, here is an item that was posted on this blog:
http://thegallopingbeaver.blogspot.com/
****
An idea
I have the immense good fortune to have a great long-time friend, who sent me this e-mail yesterday, after he sent it to Jack:
Dear Mr. Layton;
Please, please, please meet with M. Douceppe, M. Dion and even Ms. May. Hammer out a coalition government (if the Israelis and the Italians can do it, Canada can) and go to the Governor General after Mr. Harper pulls the plug on his government and say you three can form a government. I bet if you all worked on it you could hold a government together until the “Fixed Election Date”. You could do a lot of good for Canada, and besides it would make Stephen Harper’s head explode.
Yours in conspiracy
Bruce
Thanks, Bruce. Simple, and worth a try — e-mail your non-Con MP — TODAY!!”
***
What do you think??
Cheers.
In the beginning I thought Elizabeth May was refreshing, and a different voice in politics. Someone who could have resonated with voters, because of her down to earth “image”. But since I’ve gotten to see her in the political arena, I have realized that she is not a very good leader.
She is the only recognizable Green Party member in Canada (to people like me, who don’t have a party). She’s done nothing to try to sell us her Green “team”. I went on their website to try to learn more about their platform. Aside from Ms May, you don’t see much from anyone else except Jim Harris (their former leader). They are more Right Wing than people realize (with the obvious exception of their Environmental Policy). It’s unfortunate they are being thought of as “liberal”, when really they aren’t close. Honestly, I was really disappointed when she decided to run against Peter MacKay, and Mr Dion “endorsed” it by not running a Liberal in that riding. That is where I really figured out who she was, and sadly that was a really bad decision by Mr Dion. I understand the whole idea of not campaigning hard against the other party’s leader but at least field a candidate – give your party someone to vote for. I think Mr Dion should rethink this one, and field a candidate. It would be easy enough to pull off, you could sell the reason to the public (We thought she stood for this, when in reality she stands for that… therefore we can’t endorse that kind of thinking… etc).
As far as the debates go, until the networks decide to have a series of debates, Canadians feel (rightly so) that it will be a waste of time. All the pols do is end up talking over one another and yelling, and viewers tune out, and change the channel…
I’d like to see:
1) Harper vs Dion, one on one.
2) An all party town hall where the leaders are asked questions about their specific policies, and they have to explain them. We have a lot of smart university students that could ask the questions, this would engage a younger audience.
3) A debate about the environment only (Harper/Dion/Layton/May). A bit of a dog and pony show with so many leaders, but an important enough issue to have it’s own debate.
4) Duceppe can debate Harper/Dion/Layton in Quebec only.
CBC, if you are reading this, as you likely are, it would actually be watchable, as compared to the debates of the past. Time to switch it up and get with the 21st century. Our political makeup is different than in the 60′s, why keep doing the typical 60′s debates “one in French, one in English”.
It’s time to progress as a nation.
Sure, go ahead and include elizabeth May in a leaders debate. Let the country have a firsthand look at her ridiculous agenda to tax and regulate. As for Dion’s brilliant “green shift” plan, Ipsos-Reid is reporting a significant decline in support for the liberal party despite Dion’s “summer campaign”.
I think the winner of this next election may be the loser. Whoever has to ride through the upcoming storm may be out of office in a year. I do have a suggestion for each of the two major parties, if you wish to be elected, you need to institute the following with a solemnn vow to introduce the legislation, and to do so within the first three months, or vow to step down if you do not do so. The winning ticket for the next election is democratic reform. The party that guarantees into law, that the next election will be held on the basis that local candidates must have 50% plus one vote, in order to represent the riding, will be the winning party.
This may have to be done with run offs, or second choice on the ballot, so be it. I would prefer independent candidates but barring that, this would be the most acceptable I believe for all Canadians. The party that will guarantee this method of voting for the next election will get my vote and the vote, I suspect, of a lot of people who have decided not to vote. This will bring many of the turned off voters back into politics. If neither party does so, I will have to vote for the candidate I deem to be the most independent in my riding, and the majority of the eligible voters will not bother to show up at the polls.
Support drops for Green Shift
But fewer say it will affect their vote
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=29866988-40dc-4aa7-a344-8a1769628d8a
I am a supporter of the Green Shift, but this article underlines the fact that the message is not getting out – properly, that is. There is more negative CRAP from the CPC, than positive information from the Libs.
Better get crackin’.
I think those of us who support Stephane Dion and his team need to work our best in this election so he is gone before he has the chance to ruin Canada more.
By Bonnie L on 09.02.08 10:13 am
This reads that I am referring to Dion and of course I am referring to Harper being out of power in Canada’s government.
In the face of a Harper majority, many, many of my urban peers (30ish) are thinking twice about voting for the Greens, NDP or even the Bloc. Too many values clash with those of the Conservatives on many fronts from Arts and Culture, Accountability, Social Issues, Education, Healthcare, Environment and even the imbalances in the economy (manufacturing vs. resource).
I strongly believe that this is a historical moment in Canadian electoral history. The upcoming election will have consequences far and wide. We will either remain an open and just society, or become a haven for industrialist elite.
This worries me greatly. Never have I had such concern for the future in Canada. The Harperites have clearly shown their dedication to a vision of Canada that is, as they put it, enough to render a country none of us will recognise.
The part most concerning, is the blindness of the followers. Those who will justify dishonesty to gain power, and who do not question the actions of their leader. The ends justify the means, yet, no one really seems to know what that end will be. That is fascist and chauvinist, in the literal sense.
I am really worried this time folks. Never has an election had such an emotional impact from my memory or experience.
This is not a vote about going to war, in a foreign land. It has become a vote for a war within our land. Such polarization of views is seldom seen.
Ooops.. to comment on topic.
I am not sure if Ms. May should be on the debate. Most comments here seem to be from those wanting another stick to hit Harpo with. That, to me, is what is wrong with the idea.
If we start letting a party of one join in the debate to choose a national leader, it could become precedent to having an independent deciding to join the Communists, or Libertarians, or Rhinos, or Marijuana Party. While it would be interesting to hear their points raised in the HoC, a leadership debate where clarity of vision and comparison of views from those with the possibility of forming government, more participants would make the debate less valuable.
I have nothing against the Greens, but now is not the time.
One thing I do hope for, is that Harpo will not be able to decide what questions will be asked, and what ones he will answer. If he can decide the content of the debate, then it will not be a debate – just a platform for partisan blather.
The petulant Liz May had now stated that she will sue for her right to participate in a leaders debate citing the recent switch of Wilson as validation.
Do Canadians really need this desperate litigeous American clogging up our courts whining about her “rights”?
Canada’s democracy WILL NOT RECOVER unless “first things first” becomes the motto that voters understand. The FIRST and only necessity, at the moment, requires getting rid of The New Conservative Government. Therefore, STRATEGIC VOTING is the only thing that makes any sense at this juncture.
Teach this, NOW, to all voters. Plain and simple.
Thats a pretty sad looking pair of cowpokes!
I’ve always wondered why a one-province party can participate in a federal debate anyways. Can anyone enlighten me on this please?
Mr. Garth TurnerMP,
You did not get my vote last time because I don’t trust Harper!
(So I didn’t even bother to see what you were all about.)
I started to pay attention when PMSH came out with this non-clean air plan,
and he kicked you our of this Party.
Harper has only made maters worse with his bold face lies and breaking laws! No person should be above the law especially PMSH!!!
PMSH will not get my vote ever!!!
Why are the Corporate run media still been allowed to pick and choose who they let into the leaders debate?
I thought we lived in a free country?
PMSH is a Bush neo-conn’s puppet and is taking us down the dictator/corporate fascism road!
I hope people start to talk to there neighbors soon.
Vote ABC-h, anything but conservative – harper and his gang.
PMSH has asked elections Canada to look into electronic voting and vote counting machines.
If you think that sounds good you and either EVIL or uninformed! You have heave of hackers and government organizations, subversion?
Just look south of the boarder!
If voting and vote counting machines are brought in to Canadian Federal elections we will never be free again!
The Greens got my vote last time because some of there ideas sounded good, but not all. I didn’t think they would form the Government, but a green MP or two might be ok, last time. And I was pissed off that the corporate run media was controlling whom the voters got to hear in the debate!!! I thought we lived in a free country?
This Time I’m waiting to read all the parties platforms. I’ll skip PMSH’s since I have been paying attention and he and his gang, is just not whom I want to be ruled under!
At this time I am leaning toward Mr. Stephan DionMP/Liberal’s.
I have heard Mr. DionMP speak a couple times and I think he is a smart guy and has the leadership qualities that make for a great leader.
The GreenShift plan makes sense as well as some of the other ideas I have heard Mr. DionMP speak on. The Election platform will be interesting to see as we go through the election campaign.
(So Mr. TurnerMP, may get my vote this time rounds?)
I surtainly do not want PMSH and his gang to get back into office ever again!
If PMSH brings in electronic voting machines he’ll never leave, and will be become slaves. Can you say yes big brother, Orwell 1984.
With the RFID tags even being put into money they could keep track of who voted and for whom, and still make the outcome anywhy they want, and with out a paper trail! You can help count the votes so you and your families will still live in a free country!
Since the First past the post system we have, means the Party with the most seats, there leader gets to be PM (king), I’ll be paying close attention to all the leaders and there records.
PMSH is PM with only 20% of the people actually voting for him last time.
(He got 1/3 of the votes, about 60% of the voters came out to vote.)
You can ignore the politicians at your own pearl, because what they do with effect you and your families future!
What kind of world do you want your family to try and survive in?
Your a critical-thinker, you are well informed, and you have been paying attention so you’ll know who you want to vote for next time?
Are you getting out to help elect some one you think would be a good PM or MP?
You don’t like any or them? Are you going to run for office this time?
Why not?
Have you had time to see these great informative shows yet?
‘How It All Ends’ 10min
And
‘The Most IMPORTANT Video You’ll Ever See.’ (Scrawl down, same link.)
http://www.youtube.com/user/wonderingmind42
Robert Fisk writes…
…Canadian department of national defence – in an effort to staunch the flow of Canadian blood in the sands of Afghanistan (93 servicemen and women “fallen” so far in their hopeless Nato war against the Taliban) – has brought in a Virginia-based US company called the Terrorism Research Centre to help. According to the DND, these “terrorism experts” are going, among other subjects, to teach Canadian troops – DO NOT LAUGH, READERS, I BEG YOU DO NOT LAUGH – “the history of Islam”! And yes, these “anti-terrorism” heroes are also going to lecture the lads on “radical (sic) Islam”, “sensitivities” and “cultural and ideological issues that influence insurgent decision-making”. It is a mystery to me why the Canadian brass should turn to the US for assistance – at a cost of almost a million dollars, I should add – when America is currently losing two huge wars in the Muslim world.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisks-world-why-do-we-keep-letting-the-politicians-get-away-with-lies-913244.html
Election issue???
Do Canadians really need this desperate litigeous American clogging up our courts whining about her “rights”?
By Bocanut on 09.02.08 12:12 pm
She learned all about it from sueing Stephen Harper!
I have a few questions to ask the Harper Party First How will Senate reform help the people who have lost their manufacturing jobs? Second How does a youth crime bill help child poverty?. Third how does northern sovereignty hept the enviroment? Forth which party has the plan and the team?
Fifth Which party has a strong leader who stand up to a bully. Sixth which party is dealing with the bread and butter issues that effect all of us not just some of us, remember targeted tax cuts?
Lisa: Because they are a federal party.
I wonder the same thing about the Alliance M.P.’s.
I read this with interest in the newspaper this morning.
“Harpers attacks and the Conservatives aggressive anti Green Shift advertising is having more of a negative effect then anything Mr. Dion is saying is being positive for the Green Shift.”
That is quite interesting. I believe that a party should be on the offensive during an election campaign, but it seems like the Liberal party will be mostly on the defensive trying to defend their ill timed, and confusing carbon tax to voters.
As to the topic whether Ms.May can participate in the Leaders debate, I think once they have an elected M.P. by all means then they should be included. If Mr. Wilson had gone to Marxist-Leninist party, should their leader be included? I think not, same goes for Ms. May unfortunatly.
“MP (Blair Wilson, from BC, who ran afoul of Elections Canada and was punted by Dion)”
I believe Blair Wilson was cleared. Maybe you should check Garth, instead of further slandering the man.
The reason he was sitting as an Indie was because he ran afoul of Elections Canada, which is why Dion punted him. No slander there. Besides, I actually went to bat for the guy behind the scenes. Not that you’d care, apparently. — Garth
Do Canadians really need this desperate litigeous American clogging up our courts whining about her “rights”?
By Bocanut on 09.02.08 12:12 pm,
You could apply the same arguments to the other Canadian politicians, including our current Prime Minister, that do the same thing.
MAYBE-RHINO 12:02
While Harper will not get to frame the questions for the debate the MSM does! Yup those same folks trotting out yesterdays highly flawed poll that is completely out of whack with the two polls earlier this week that got little press and claiming it is the gospel truth. Those polling companies came within a percentage or two last time while this one yesterday is only accurate to within 3-4% and to the best of my knowledge have never predicted an election result close yet which is why the right wing media use them. Do you honestly think tha the debate matters as it will be stacked against Dion anyway.
Unless Ms. May endorses the Liberal plan as a good first step while pointing out how her plan will do the most for the environment of any party, nothing matters as she will be a liability for the Liberals rather than an asset. Since the debate will be a waste of time anyway I don’t see why we are argueing if she is in or out as it really doesn’t matter. Harper is laughing all the way to the bank if it is that easy to get his opposition to waste their time on irrelvent things just by making a statement or two.
Get on target and that target is Harper!!!Every momemnt we stray from that target makes him stronger.
By Lisa on 09.02.08 12:35 pm
Maybe because 50% plus of the vote in the second most populous province gives them a high enough average vote across the country and more MP’s than the NDP.
Plus, with the exception of being seperatist, Mr.Duceppe actually has some good ideas. If he wasn’t a seperatist and his party was national, I might even vote for him!
Bocanut:
No more than Canadians want a desperate litigious “American wanna-be” clogging up our courts and holding parliamentarians to ransom in an unprecedented libel suit
and sadly that was a really bad decision by Mr Dion. I understand the whole idea of not campaigning hard against the other party’s leader but at least field a candidate – give your party someone to vote for. I think Mr Dion should rethink this one, and field a candidate.
By R Smith on 09.02.08 11:10 am
There is nothing stopping the Liberal voters in that riding from nominating an Independent Liberal Candidate for them to vote for. Either that or just vote for the NDP, which ever they feel is the best strategy. Bottom line it is a free country and who ever can post the required deposit and proffer the necessary backing signatures can and should run! The federal party organizations does not own the voters and this is the message that the would be Liberal Party voters of that riding must send to Ottawa! This is the essence of democracy and our Charter Rights.
Storm clouds on the horizon for deceiving Stevie…
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=762222
Thats a pretty sad looking pair of cowpokes!
By gary v on 09.02.08 12:33 pm
And I bet you took all day working on this amazing comment…
This kind of thing makes me crazy:
Conservatives Most Trusted on Jobs and the Economy and the War in Afghanistan
By bob on 09.02.08 2:02 am
Bob, it’s insane that this is the message that Canadians are forced to digest on an on-going basis.
Democracy is not being served if we the people allow this MSM print to go unchecked.
The Parkland Institute knows better and they have stated that since the beginning of the ’80′s, governments have steadily WITHDRAWN from direct involvement in the economy. “Privatization, de-regulation, mergers, and free trade became buzz-words. The result has been increasing economic instability and a series of apparent contradictions with profound consequences for the economic and social well-being and security of individuals, communities, provinces, and Canada itself”.
Mulroney got the ball rolling with NAFTA and now Harper is on the verge of finishing the job and all he has to do is cross the “T’s” and dot the “I’s”. We can then kiss our own security of energy and economic independence along with our soveirenty goodbye. And what is the press reporting???? The very party that is causing the economic problem is the Most trusted?????? And Pigs will Fly..
Corporations have effectively secured control over the reins of public policy making in this country to the point where our citizens have become politically disenfranchised.
What drives me crazy, Bob, is that we never see the MSM interview think tank groups like the Parkland or Polaris Institute or the many others that are knowledgeable and will give straight , honest answers. These groups are passionate about our great country and they realize that we the people have to work hard to protect our democracy and our freedoms and they will back up any community group that needs their expertise. We’re not alone.
There are no reporters in the MSM anymore, they are all just presenters and the cowards will do nothing to challenge the PM’s lies, unaccountability and total disrespect for the Canadian citizen.
Most Trusted????……And Pigs will Fly.
wjp on 09.02.08 11:29 am
Your suggestions are sound and would have served useful if democratic reform would be an election issue when overshadowed by Cdns concern over economic conditions.
When faced with voting against corporate greed and the economic hope of maintaining an income over voting against a corrupt justice system it would seem likely the ones motivated to vote would not vote against corporate greed.
That said when the futility of voting against either unwinds with the August numbers and economic conditions fully dictate change, the people might vote against all, quite vocally in all likelihood.
the melt is on
I’ve always wondered why a one-province party can participate in a federal debate anyways. Can anyone enlighten me on this please?
By Lisa on 09.02.08 12:35 pm
————–
Boy the way you and Bocanut talk you would have it so no one can debate but Steve & Stephane. You people are Anti Democratic. I think you are living in the wrong country and political environment. Maybe move to some 3rd world dictatorship country. You might be happier.
Thats a pretty sad looking pair of cowpokes!
By gary v on 09.02.08 12:33 pm
No Gary, sad is when you wear your hat on backwards. Let’s see now, who do we know that’s from Calgary and stupid enough to put his hat on backwards?
Can you think of anyone Gary?
One seat – whether earned or not – does not a party make. Flash of the obvious: May is smart and a great debater, but she does not yet have a place in prime time politics, no matter how smart, silver-tongued and sincere she may be.
By Herb on 09.02.08 8:49 am
I agree and add to that she[her party] is known by the decisions they make. The decision to accept renegade Brent Wilson will not enhance her/their reputation in either the short or long term. Until the Green Party fields a major convention with accomplished delegates, and acts like a serious contender for governing power, they do not warrant wasting your vote in this critical federal election.
Ooo, news from my riding in Regina — my Tory MP just announced he’s not running again because of anxiety and prescription drug addiction — that’s Dave Batters — and Dion just announced here this morning that our former police chief is running for the Libs.
So that’s one SK seat the CPC may well lose, and with the very respected Cal Johnston running, the Libs may well win.
Thats a pretty sad looking pair of cowpokes!
By gary v on 09.02.08 12:33 pm
And I bet you took all day working on this amazing comment…
By wjp on 09.02.08 1:31 pm
———————-
LOL, but it did make me remember this picture wjp
Sheriff Steve
LOL and people make fun of Harper in his cowboy outfit! May’s picture tops that by a “country” mile!
Strong and respected leadership is what Canada needs. Anyone interested in how Stephen Harper is seen internationaly here is a UK MP and Shadow Secretary of Defence.
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=eD1808cLqaQ
Garth, checked in first with the G&M site and it’s stated already, Polls polls and more polls…..I hope this site does not turn out that. Dion is an underdog and will have to fight on two fronts the Harper controlled media and the Harper fed pollsters…tough sledding for sure.
By David Bakody on 09.02.08 6:08 am
David you raise a very good point. All Pollsters should be required to declare who funded their canvassing, and who owns them! There is some speculation already that there is subtle covert ownership and funding of this industry. The shareholders need to be named and accountable for the methodology and data acquired.
Here’s a good idea – election gives cons a minority again.
Then the con party realizing Harper can’t give them a majority turf him out. As the liberals didn’t win, they turf out Dion.
Both duds out in one election.
Yeah, but Dion’s pose looks more Matt Dillon, while harper’s makes Festus look smart.
Oh yeah, and Dion’s cowboy outfit FITS him. Another contrast.
That said when the futility of voting against either unwinds with the August numbers and economic conditions fully dictate change, the people might vote against all, quite vocally in all likelihood.By unintended consequences on 09.02.08 1:34 pm
How can not voting bring change?
Storm clouds on the horizon for deceiving Stevie…
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=762222
By wjp on 09.02.08 1:29 pm
I read another account at cbc: http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/09/02/oecd.html
I am sick to death of mealy mouthed words like credit crunch and the corporate media owners giving a stage to an endless stream of talking heads who convinced the gullible public it was just a ‘glitch’. Either the Cons are so incompetent that they did not see these problems coming, or they knew all along, and decided to lie instead. Lies have a limited shelf life until the truth comes along and buries them. Do they come clean once the cat is out of the bag? No, they spin more webs of deceit instead, make laws only to break them, like good soldiers of others tell them to. Gas prices UP. Domestic fuel UP. Food UP. MP’s salaries and pensions UP.
House prices Down. Spare cash Down. Available credit DOWN. Pensions DOWN, Quality of life Down. And hopefully, Tolerance DOWN! Why do the Cons and Canadians stand back to watch a coming train wreck?
They need a distraction FAST, let’s have an election and pretend our dysfunction is really ‘their’ dysfunction. Let’s bleed some more money from the citizens pockets, let’s tell CTV et al to keep using sissy spin words like ‘glitch’ and credit crunch. We’re in a Recession people, then Depression. Depression brings hardship and struggle. The brink of Recession and how do they respond?
The public need to tell these idiots (Cons and their media) to Shut The Hell Up Now! Get Angry! Speak Out! Don’t allow bots like Ritz tell you Listeriosis is not an election issue. IT IS! Slam changes to aircraft safety inspection system, to food safety! The warnings have been in place for almost 2 years now, and what did we do? We expected Opposition to take them to task. They squabbled instead. Doesn’t anybody remember NETWORK 1976! Get Mad. It’s the only healthy and sane thing to do right now.
Brain, love your posts.
Has anyone heard the rumour that the reason the P.M. didn’t sprint over to Rideau Hall is he wants to announce a new Supreme Court justice before Parliament disolution??
Harper is counting on the vote splits. 2009 is another election. Do you really think that if he’s not punished during this election he won’t be in the next? That’s a lot of money the Conservatives are wasting. Money that could have been used to fund social programs, arts, food inspections and the environment.
jmho
By Dee on 09.02.08 12:42 a
You forgot to mention those 10 or so seats in the HoC Ontario has been short changed in the redistribution. This is blatant Gerrymandering in its truest form.
I’ve always wondered why a one-province party can participate in a federal debate anyways. Can anyone enlighten me on this please?
By Lisa on 09.02.08 12:35 pm
————–
Boy the way you and Bocanut talk you would have it so no one can debate but Steve & Stephane. You people are Anti Democratic. I think you are living in the wrong country and political environment. Maybe move to some 3rd world dictatorship country. You might be happier.
By Randy on 09.02.08 1:38 pm
Jeez, wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning Randy?! As I said, I didn’t know the reason why a party who only speaks for 1 province in 10 would have national status. Why is it anti-democratic to wonder why a sepratist party whom only Quebeckers can vote for, has national status. I’m just trying to learn here love. Relax.
By austin on 09.02.08 1:44 pm
Do you know what Shadow Secretary fo Defence means?
We would call it the Opposition Critic. And that’s what Dr. Liam Fox is. He is a member of the opposition Conservatives.
With that in mind, would you expect him to say anything different about PMSH?
I understand the airline industry will inspect their own airplanes. Why are we paying all these fees and tax monies for security? Terrorists don’t have to plant anything, they can sit back and let corporations blow the plane up for them.
Are they going to allow the private nuclear power companies put up reactors where ever they want to? How about in the middle of parliament? MPs will trust that regular maintenance will done won’t they?
How about drug dealers? They can regulate themselves too. Importers? Sure why not?
If everything is going to corporate self regulation then why do we need government? To blather and prance around in a moo-moo? To tell us they’re moral because they belong to a church while they collect taxes to give to a private corporation for election campaign ads that hasn’t even begun yet?
Cynical? Me? Nah!
So that’s one SK seat the CPC may well lose, and with the very respected Cal Johnston running, the Libs may well win.
By MJ Patchouli on 09.02.08 1:42 pm
I watched the Dion interview. The longest one I`ve seen. As far as a choice between Dion, Rae, Iggy, or McKenna I would back Dion.
Rae can lie with a straight face, Iggy lies with a smile and McKenna really believes everything he thinks. At least Mr. Dion looked a little embarrassed to announce the crime rate was down. Everyone down on the streets know the rate is down because of the way it`s tabulated now and unreported crime is at historical highs. It`ll never sell to the masses.
Thats a pretty sad looking pair of cowpokes!
By gary v on 09.02.08 12:33 pm
Wearing ten gallon hats, blue jeans, and high heeled riding boots does not a cowboy/girl make. This is typical dude duds and in no way looks like the cattle herders and sod busters I grew up with, went to school with, or am related to. While the West is changing and the imported American style western dress is now popular wear, it is an adopted statement lacking in original Canadian content. This disappears very quickly in the below zero blizzard gales replaced by styles more akin to the traditional Eskimos! Fur lined “long johns”, anyone?
Austin: Quoting an ultra-conservative U.K. M.P. such as Liam Fox is hardly a boost to Harper’s image world-wide.
It is the conservatives such as he, Harper and Bush who have tarnished their nations reputations across the world.
Garth, in my heart if Ignatief were leader I’d probably vote Liberal instead of Green.
I don’t know why but that is the honest truth of how I feel right now. Good luck and I suspect you’ll be getting my vote in the election after this so hopefully Harpo doesn’t do more much more damage than he did to me as an income trust holder.
Even your reversal of the IT decsions won’t help most of us who were screwed by Harper’s lie.
Thats a pretty sad looking pair of cowpokes
BY GARY V 09.02.08 12:33 PM
Nice try Gary, but actually Stephane Dion very handsome in cowboy hat and boots.
When I bought my ticket to the Stampede breakfast the speaker was not announced, but we just wanted to start somewhere. By fluke, we arrived just before Mr. Dion, so we had a few moments to walk in with him. There he was, and my first thought, (knowing everybody has to dress western), was whew, he looks so cute and handsome, how great is that.
I’ll never forget the Stampede years ago..
http://tinyurl.com/56937w
“The final decision will be that of the consortium of broadcasters who put on the gig.”
Ouch. We call it democracy, but in the end it’s all just business.
So the Conservative Opposition member of Parliament in Britain thinks that Stephen Harper has bought strong leadership to Canada? Wow, I bet they really had to twist his arm to say that.
To bob of 09.02.08 2:02 am
Re: Liberal “Tax and Spend” cartoon
From one of my favourite television programmes, may it rest in peace. Thanks to Tom Chervinsky for sharing it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZU4twOTXX0
By austin on 09.02.08 1:44 pm
You might want to tell this CONSERVATIVE MP that is was Paul Martin that put Canada in Kandahar, not deceiving Stephen…
Let us admit it, Dion, for all his honesty and reputation for truth, is not inspiring. If he is still compared with May, he may bring down the party’s popularity.
To Ernesto Villanueva of 09.02.08 3:28 am
Re: Dion not inspiring
I have to strongly disagree with your point that Dion is not inspiring. I had the opportunity to meet the man on a few occasions and listen to him speak uninterrupted by his handlers. His passion and vision, not only for the environment but for Canada, is tangible and inspiring. I have told him this. Admittedly, he is not someone built for the 30 second television soundbite. However, I think if people take the chance and get to know him, they will be inspired like I am.
Do you think Elizabeth May vetted Blair Wilson?
Blair Harris who is a Chartered Accountant and seems to have problems managing money and with his father in law.
Here is an extract from Wikipedia and while it may not all be true it might be wise to check out. I hope Elizabeth did because if this is true, I wouldn’t want him for my MP.
Here is a portion from Wikipedia
Bill Lougheed, Wilson’s father in law, made several allegations in the October 28, 2007 edition of The Province[4], a Vancouver-based newspaper. The Province’s article alleged that Wilson and his wife were subject to Social Services Tax Act liens on three properties and owe $2.1 million in bank mortgages, that Wilson misled the media about the true extent of his business success, exaggerating the number of restaurants he founded and claiming to have sold an accountancy business his in-laws claim closed, among other discrepancies, and that when Wilson’s two restaurants, Mahoneys and Wilson’s Steakhouse, closed, he was taken twice to the B.C. Employment Standards Tribunal for refusing to pay employees, was sued twice for failing to pay contractors, was twice compelled by the courts to pay GST owing, and was also taken to court by a supplier over $33,839 that was owed (this amount was later paid).
The real problem is our first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system. If your’re concerned about vote splitting then the solution is to get rid of FPTP.
With proportional representation a party would get seats in proportion to the percentage of the vote that it received in the election. No party could gain seats due to vote splitting.
I hope the Greens get more seats. It is about time the GOLP (Grand Old Liberal Party) was humbled for longer than 3.5 years. They need a true revitalization, not a leader that just keeps pulling the party further and further left.
My son is voting green because he says they don’t have a chance of getting elected. Wonder how many more think that way?
BY EMILIE 09.01.08 11:44PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Emilie,
Is there any way he’d give you a few minutes?
You can explain to him that governments around the world, not just Canada, are crippled because of many, many decades of corporations getting too much influence over time, bit by bit, into legislation and into our psyche and habits – and into our bureaucracy. It was my fault, yours, our parents.. now we have the internet to reverse the damage, using our collective knowledge.
As individuals, we have to come together, and understand the problem, or we will lose the middle class eventually. Statistics, and math, and the present misperceptions of free enterprise, will eventually ‘flow’ so much money to the influential, that we’ll be scratching our heads wondering who was responsible. Actually, it will be our kids and their kids who suffer more. Your son will one day realize his vote had mattered and he blew it. Help him understand. Use the internet, it’s a great tool to find out more.
There is too much power, because of money, in the hands of corporate entities. Understand corporations first.. that they don’t act as individuals, despite being made up of individuals. They have too many obligations to profit. The human side of corporations always errs on the side of what you and I would call greed, due to shareholders and business goals. For instance, they have to set some safety aside at times. So corporations are not “good” for individuals (us) in that sense.
Corporate influence has built against our best interests, given enough time. We’re seeing it now. So they should not be given such a heavy hand in decisions in government, and yet they are. Government is the people and we should be putting people first. Now we have a party in power who are the closest to those corporations. Look at what that party does to further corporate interest… globalization isn’t for us, it’s for them. Breaking down our rights and protections isn’t good for us, but it is for corporations. Watch the 2 hour Canadian documentary called The Corporation, found on the internet, if you need reassurance of that.
Your son will probably understand you to that point, but if not, have him click on the Polaris Institute report posted by someone yesterday.
Then, clarify something for him, that while any party can be somewhat involuntarily hostage to big business and the heavy and unfair influence by their corporate lobbyists, that the route that Mr. Harper’s group has OPENLY taken, is to find their own power and influence by acting as a catalyst to further and speed up the corporate agenda, nearly in leaps and bounds. It’s embarrassing for Canada, and bad. It is an open secret that they push for big business. Why? The funding, so they can be the government. After all, Harper has his own agenda too, and I’m sure you are aware of that part, about Harper. But just look at the obvious advertising dollars the Conservatives brag about and spend. Ad executives with lobby money will buy them another win again, just like it did last time.
But luckily more and more people are getting THE BIG PICTURE. More and more are understanding what is wrong. That allowing businesses to be the head haunchos, to push globalization, and that the ‘trashing’ of the protections that we in our country had enjoyed, has to be reversed. The ‘businesses first’ model is now archaic and disproven, but Harper will keep that model going, to our detriment. Our food supply, bad imports, public healthcare and quality of life all depend on electing a leader who will help Canadians battle for quality of life… oh, and the leader will need a majority, ethics, ideas and guts to reverse our problems, now that more and more people see the post WWII results of corporate influences.
And never forget, Harper was president of the National Citizens Coalition, which was set up by Colin Brown in London in the 1960s as a corporate lobbyist group with their first purpose of privatizing healthcare. It is a corporate front, posing as a citizen group, yet it’s secrecy and corporate lobby power is renowned. Now their president is our prime minister? How dumb are we?
http://tinyurl.com/5psh3m
The Greens cannot help Canada out of this history defining problem. Harper is the catalyst to speed up corporate influence for their own interests…they work together, and he’s already done plenty of damage so fast. Layton is showing only self interest. Only M. Dion has the ethics, honesty, morality, the ideas, the guts and fearlessness to put the people first and reverse the undue influence that corporations now hold, and that they work relentlessly to get more of. We’ve got to stop allowing apathy and ignorance to trump us.
‘The Corporation’ documentary won many international awards, see IMDB, including the Sundance film festival audience award. It is 3 hours but it will change your life. Please save this a watch it with the family.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=192012118972057552
Another poster had some good links and a great post yesterday. See 09.01.08 7:39 PM at:
http://tinyurl.com/5l82ga
There are “wide-spread concerns about rapid changes within Canada’s political and economic culture. Political discourse has taken a new turn as the language and assumptions of the marketplace have expanded corporate power and challenged the role and ethos of the public sector and the commons.” Please read his full comment at 7:39 pm last thread.
The only leader with any hope to reverse these trends of giving corporations undue influence, and reclaiming our best interests is Mr. Dion.
In today’s G&M: “Harper Tories on the brink of majority, poll finds.”
1) The only accurate one is from the Nanos Poll.
2) Polls from all those Harper friendly newspapers are unreliable and should be ignored.
3) Canadians do not need these inaccurate polls to guide them cast their votes.
4) Canadians have a BRAIN.
This kind of thing makes me crazy:
Conservatives Most Trusted on Jobs and the Economy and the War in Afghanistan
By bob on 09.02.08 2:02 am
I’d like to share this resolution with you. The whereas of the text comes from the USW of Canada. The resolution comes from a concerned Canadian.
Resolution Regarding Softwood Lumber Framework Settlement
WHEREAS: The Stephen Harper government has hastily agreed to a framework settlement with the United States to resolve the softwood lumber dispute; and
WHEREAS: this framework was agreed to without any consultation whatsoever with affected workers and communities; and
WHEREAS: The proposed framework settlement allows the United States to keep $1 Billion in illegally collected tariffs and duties, half of which is being directed to US producers contrary to WTO rulings; and
WHEREAS: Canadian producers will only recoup 80% of the illegally collected duties at C$1.10 for every US dollar when much of the duties were paid at as high as C$1.60 for every US dollar; and
WHEREAS: Canada is abandoning all litigation, even though Canada is clearly winning; and
WHEREAS: Canada’s legal battle has been funded by many millions of taxpayer dollars; and
WHEREAS: Even after this agreement there will still be measures that restrict Canadian access to the important US market for lumber while no such restriction are placed on any other country that exports into the US market; and
WHEREAS: Canadian producers have historically and recently shown that they are too short-sighted and too desperate for profits to make critical investments in their Canadian operations, Canadian workforce, domestic research and development or long-term, strategic measures to protect and expand the industry in this country;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
The CPC party of Harper are NOT the MOST Trusted on jobs and the economy.
THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT:
The CPC party of Harper MUST NOT be allowed to continue destroying our economy and our sovereignty.
THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT:
Steve Harper is a SELL-OUT.
Strong and respected leadership is what Canada needs. Anyone interested in how Stephen Harper is seen internationaly here is a UK MP and Shadow Secretary of Defence.
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=eD1808cLqaQ
By austin on 09.02.08 1:44 pm
I don’t doubt he shares the same views as Stevie.
“He is socially conservative in outlook, at one time even calling for a return of the flogging of criminals.”
http://www.google.com/search?q=Dr.+%2B+Liam+%2BFox+%2B+UK&rls=com.microsoft:en-ca:IE-Address&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7SUNA
Reality Check: Jason Kenney’s Litany of Fabrications
September 2, 2008
ISSUE:
Secretary of State for Multiculturalism Jason Kenney today held a press conference where he distorted facts to suit his own partisan purposes.
REALITY:
Kenney’s Fabrication #1: “(Dion) has failed to provide a single greenhouse gas reduction target under his plan.”
Reality: On page 16 of the Liberal Green Shift, it states: “We believe that our target should be to reduce greenhouse emissions by 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020. This should be increased to at least 25 per cent if other countries take on comparable efforts.”
Kenney’s Fabrication #2: “Mr. Dion must also explain why Atlantic Canada Liberals even failed to mention the plan at their summer caucus retreat.”
Reality: Here’s what the Halifax Chronicle-Herald reported at the time of the Liberal Atlantic Caucus meeting: “The Atlantic Liberals spent a lot of time discussing Mr. Dion’s Green Shift, a policy proposal that would put a carbon tax on polluting fuels while returning the money to Canadians through tax reductions and rebates.” (Aug. 8, 2008)
Kenney’s Fabrication #3: “This is a plan that will destroy jobs and will drive up the cost of nearly everything.”
Reality: Pages 36 and 37 of the Green Shift make it abundantly clear that our plan, when fully implemented, will reduce the federal corporate tax rate to only 14 per cent, lower the small business tax rate by an additional one per cent, provide $600 million in annual accelerated capital cost allowances and will make the science and research tax credit 25 per cent refundable. All of this will spur jobs and economic growth.
It’s why even prominent economists are in favour of our plan, while recognizing that the Conservative plan will also cost money. Just look at what Jack Mintz, former president and CEO of the C.D. Howe Institute and world-renowned fiscal and tax policy specialist, had to say:
“I don’t think the (Liberal) plan will be negative on growth…In fact, it will probably be positive. Because what you’re doing is taking taxes off investment and work effort and you’re putting it on to consumption.” (The Kingston Whig-Standard, June 20, 2008)
“The problem actually with the Conservative plan is that the targets themselves could create some real hardship over the next several years and people might face even bigger impacts under the Conservative plan in terms of prices than what the Liberal plan would deliver.” (The Hill Times, July 14, 2008)
Kenney’s Fabrication #4: “It’s a tax that will punish seniors who are living on fixed income.”
Reality: Page 34 of the Green Shift explicitly states that under our plan the Guaranteed Income Supplement which supports low-income seniors will increase by $600 per year, for an investment of over $800 million over four years.
Kenney’s Fabrication #5: “It’s a tax that will hit working families struggling hard to get by. And it will hit students trying to attain an education and others who can afford it least.”
Reality: With the Green Shift’s income tax cuts and credits, all Canadians – no matter their income level – will benefit. For example, a family of four making $60,000 per year will receive approximately $1,300 in tax benefits, while a single mother with two children making $35,000 per year will get back more than $1,600.
Also, page 32 of the Green Shift explicitly states that the employment credit will be redesigned so that it puts up to $250 more annually into the pockets of working Canadians. In addition, the Working Income Tax Benefit, which supplements the earnings of low-income workers, will be improved so that it provides benefits on the first dollar earned, which is $3,000 sooner than the Conservative plan.
Kenney Fabrication #6: “Mr. Dion should explain to Canadians why senior Liberals keep telling Canadians that his carbon tax plan isn’t yet finished. If it isn’t finished, what is Mr. Dion been telling Canadians about all summer long?”
Reality: Mr. Dion has always said he wanted to take the Green Shift on the road over the summer to hear from Canadians. Unlike Mr. Harper, Mr. Dion listens to feedback from others, and he is taking what he heard into consideration.
Kenney Fabrication #7: “Mr. Dion must clarify the remarks of his Agriculture Critic Wayne Easter who said of the carbon tax, and I quote, ‘we know there are problems with this.’”
Reality: The Conservatives claim that Mr.Easter has “abandoned his support” for the Green Shift. This is not true. Here is what Wayne Easter has said about the Green Shift: “There are concerns. We don’t deny that…There’s been positive feedback but there’s also been some adjustments that need to be made and we really need to sit down and talk about that and put our best foot forward.” (Wayne Easter, Canadian Press, August 29, 2008). Mr. Dion agrees with Mr. Easter that concerns with the Green Shift have been raised, and he is committed to addressing those concerns.
Kenney Fabrication #8: “Mr. Dion must clarify his position concerning the secret deals made with certain provinces on cushioning the impact of the carbon tax.”
Reality: No “secret” deals have been made with any provinces. But what the Green Shift says (page 25) is that “we will work with provinces such as British Columbia and Quebec that have already moved on carbon pricing, ensuring our system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is administered fairly, in a way that strengthens our economy.”
Kenney Fabrication #9: “Mr. Dion must explain why he contradicted B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell about the threat of double taxation for Canadians. He stated that B.C. was offered a side deal, yet Mr. Dion, a few weeks later, said there would no side deals for any province including B.C. So either Mr. Dion is being less than honest or he’s accusing the B.C. Premier of being less than honest.”
Reality: There is a big difference between a special side deal and assuring British Columbians are not doubly-taxed. What Mr. Campbell actually said is fully consistent with what it says in the Green Shift plan: “Well, Mr. Dion actually called me and said there would no be double taxation, that he does not want to impose something that will not work on British Columbians.” (Gordon Campbell, CTV Question Period, July 6, 2008)
Hi austin on 09.02.08 1:44 pm
Thanks for the link.
That’s what we need PMSH be a model for a military organization, NATO. One that would have put us into Iraq with his good buddy Bush!!! An illegal war based on lies! Saddam was not involed with 911. No Nuclear bomb program.
No WMD refound.
The USA might have thought he had WMD since they sold a bunch to him years ago.
Do you remember this WARNING from 1961?
few min.
http://www.sonyclassics.com/whywefight/main.html
Remember PMSH secrative SPP dealings!
And his backed out documants!
And his financal consideration for CandemMP!
And the In & out fraud!
And beaking his own election date LAW!
This warning also, 5 1/2 min.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces (
Have you see these yet?
Plato’s: The Allegory of the Cave. 7min
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ei7LqbYb8M&feature=related
or this movie?
Zeitgeist – The Movie
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
I have to say that one of the dumbest things I see reported (both here and in the general media) is that Green supporters will automatically become Liberal voters.
I have never voted Liberal and have yet to see a reason to. I’ve voted for the PC’s in the 80′s, Reform in the 90′s, and now Green in the 00′s. Why? Because I think government should be focused on setting up conditions for the free market to work efficiently and with as few external costs (largely environmental) as possible – which is a core part of the Green Party and not of the Liberal or NDP parties.
I’ve talked with many Green’s and post on their blogs regularly as well. Most appear to be coming from both the old PC party and the NDP but very, very few from the Liberals. Thus the death of the Green Party would not elect more Liberals but instead more NDP and/or Conservatives.
Without a Green Party I’d be a person without a place to vote this upcoming election. I’d probably hold my nose and vote for my local MP, Michael Chong, even though he is a Conservative just due to his standing up to Harper on the Quebec issue – showing he at least has some guts to stand up for what he believes in. Either that or I’d hunt down an independent who is running that I could believe in, or I’d have to do a ‘ballot rejection’ as a protest. Those options sure would help the Liberals and boot out Harper eh?
In the end, the only wasted vote is one for something you don’t believe in. I did that once, voting NDP when I felt I couldn’t trust the PC or Liberal’s while the NDP had a strong local candidate who I disagreed with on many issues but at least could trust to fight for our city (Cambridge) as I think he was the only one who actually lived there. That was the Ontario provincial election in 1990. We all know how that one turned out.
Vote for the party which matches your beliefs the closest. People doing that led to the Liberals taking up a good portion of the Green Parties carbon tax/income tax plan. Continuing to do so will lead to more changes. Voting for a party you don’t believe in will just lead to more in/out & sponsorship scandals as those in power will feel it is their right, not a privilege to serve.
Phew. Rant over.
Hi Barb the proofreader on 09.02.08 3:05 pm,
Have you seen this interveiw yet?
AMERICA: Freedom To Fascism. Aaron Russo Interview. 37min.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3254488777215293198&hl=en
Today’s Liberal posters are sounding somewhat desperate, could it be the pressure of an election coming on. Let’s have fun and keep a level head. The world is NOT going to end even if the conservatives win or retain a small minority or if the Liberals pull of a good result.
How can not voting bring change?
By Lana on 09.02.08 2:00 pm
Lana it`s economic conditions that will bring change. Voting none of the above is only an option and so far the only option for Cdns that might bring enough change before those brutal conditions set in.
Deere & Co. closing plant in Ontario, another 800 jobs gone on Harper’s watch, maybe Jim Dim should start talking up Ontario, not that it would do any good!
Tembec reduces production in two plants…
Don’t worry people Harper with his self imploding temper along with his merry band of misfits will loose the election all on their own with their big mouths and ego’s. Anyone who has watched the likes of Keeney Baird, Van Lunatic Del Mastro in Question Period or Ethics Hearings will know what I mean.
Lisa I am fine, not angry, Did you notice the nice picture link I posted of ‘Mr. Harper’ see I am in a good mood..
By Barb the proofreader on 09.02.08 2:27 pm
Hi Barb
Well good news the Liberal WV SC StS C (the longest riding description ever) is having their candidate nominating committee on September 6.
Yippee, I’ll finally have someone to work for – I could have gone out months ago door knocking. Never mind, I think the Liberal Party was reluctantly, really trying to work with Blair Wilson but there were too many non-disclosures on his part.
I have made a decision not to join the Liberal Party in order to keep things real. My thought is the party brass wrote off the riding because of Mr. Wilson’s chequered past but I love unknown underdogs.
I think we could make this really fun and if the Liberal candidate is sincere I can bring all kinds of skills to the fore.
I think I mentioned the last time I worked on a campaign was when I was eighteen. Er, I am way past mini-skirts…
Any idea what you might do for the campaign?
Strong and respected leadership is what Canada needs. Anyone interested in how Stephen Harper is seen internationaly here is a UK MP and Shadow Secretary of Defence.
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=eD1808cLqaQ
By austin on 09.02.08 1:44 pm
The Shadow Secretary of Defense obviously has no knowledge of the deceit–in and out scheme, Cadman, income trust, dictatorship–200 page manual, media control, and manipulation –we need an election, parliament is dysfunctional, of Stephen Harper domestically just to begin. Why don’t you let the British gentlemen (?) know about Harper’s behaviour in Canada?
What a bunch of hypocrits this con govt. is
Ottawa pulls $100,000 from B.C. Sierra Club’s climate-change initiative
Article Comments (72) FIONA MORROW
From Tuesday’s Globe and Mail
September 2, 2008 at 4:38 AM EDT
VANCOUVER — Environment Canada has terminated a funding contract to the B.C. chapter of the Sierra Club of Canada, causing the possible closing of a climate-change program initiative.
Pat Dolan, executive director of Environment Canada’s outreach and biodiversity priorities division, telephoned the environmental non-profit group last week to say that the $100,000 funding contract, signed May 16, was terminated.
The grant had been approved through the EcoAction Community Funding program, a federal initiative created by the Chrétien government in 1995 and supported by subsequent administrations.
“I was informed that our application had been reviewed – after the signing of our contribution agreement – against the priorities of the program, that sometimes adjustments in priorities occur, and that as a result of that review our funding was terminated,” said Jenn Hoffman, development director of Sierra Club B.C. “I was told that we are not the only organization being impacted.”
The money had been targeted for the Sierra Club’s new House Cooling initiative, in which groups of workers, neighbours or others gather in one member’s house to discuss climate change and how they, as individuals or as a group, can reduce their carbon footprint.
Sierra Club B.C. supplies materials that give information about the practical steps people can take to reduce household greenhouse-gas emissions. At the end of the gathering, guests are invited to form their own Carbon Emission Reduction Club that will meet regularly so people can support each other in their greening efforts.
Sierra Club B.C. executive director Kathryn Molloy said she was outraged by the decision to cancel funding.
“I would like clarity as to why the program has been terminated,” she said. “I was told this was the best proposal EcoAction had ever seen. This issue of climate change and empowering people to make decisions to reduce their own impact and to educate them on these issues – it has never been more salient.
“It has never been more prudent for the government to be supporting this kind of work and we’ve never had this level of interest. In my view, right before an election, this is voter suicide on their part.”
Asked for a response, Environment Canada said in an e-mailed statement: “The department regularly reviews all of its grants and contribution funding projects to ensure that taxpayers’ dollars are respected. The Department is informing project proponents on the results of the annual review. As per the terms of agreements, payments will be issued where money is owing for work already done. Any money freed up will be redirected to other programs and services to help protect our environment.”
An Environment Canada spokesman did confirm that Environment Minister John Baird is sometimes involved personally in the application review process. He could not confirm which, if any, other organizations might be affected, nor which specific issues had caused Sierra Club’s application to suddenly be deemed ineligible.
Today’s Liberal posters are sounding somewhat desperate, could it be the pressure of an election coming on. Let’s have fun and keep a level head. The world is NOT going to end even if the conservatives win or retain a small minority or if the Liberals pull of a good result.
By ST on 09.02.08 3:46 pm
Which ones are sounding somewhat desparate to you, are you sure they are Liberals? And could you give us the date as to when the world will end?
I see other have picked up on the ridiculous Cowboy look! I have the deepest respect for REAL cattle hands, been there and done that. I consider it an INSULT to the real people who do that very hard job.
Same goes for morons who dress up like law enforcement officers, attach lights to their personal vehicles and go play Cop. OOPS! A moron just got caught doing that…he is deeper Doo Doo than he ever imagined, and SHOULD be!
The only thing positive is that Dion actually fits into his clothes. Not so Harper and May! Get a life.
By Go Green on 09.02.08 3:26 pm
What pages are the Green Shift exemptions listed on? I have read the Green shift on liberal.ca, and cannot find the pages of exemptions. According to Mr. Goodale, Sask. and Alberta will not be that hard hit by the Green shift as most of their oil is exported out of the country and exempt from Green Shifting. I am trying to confirm his statement withen the reported Green Shift, but cannot find the lists on exempted products from the Green Shift. Thanks for any help.
The real problem is our first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system. If your’re concerned about vote splitting then the solution is to get rid of FPTP.
With proportional representation a party would get seats in proportion to the percentage of the vote that it received in the election. No party could gain seats due to vote splitting.
By Ian on 09.02.08 3:00 pm
There are 2 flaws with proportional representation. Who is your Member of Parliament that will look into any and all issues you have with the gov’t that need to be dealt with? And who nominates these proportional reps? Not you and me, I bet.
I just read Batters – Pallister resigned. I hope he gets on a road to full wellness. Very brave of him to come forward the way he did.
One seat – whether earned or not – does not a party make. Flash of the obvious: May is smart and a great debater, but she does not yet have a place in prime time politics, no matter how smart, silver-tongued and sincere she may be.
By Herb on 09.02.08 8:49 am
Geez, I had to wait forever to actually disagree with you on something! Oh, I’ve found all kinds of others to disagree with but this is special as with you, its rare
For me, its simple. She should be allowed to participate in the debates. Your argument as I understand it, is simple and surprisingly, I think its one of the few that is being put up by someone who isn’t Conservative.
- She has no formally elected Green MP’s elected to represent as an MP. Therefore, she should not be allowed to participate.
- (extrapolating your position) Unless there are at least two elected MP’s, there is no party to represent.
But there’s a flaw in this argument and that boils down quite simply to national poll support for the party and national representation for not only the 4.6% of those who did vote Green last year in this nation but those who would vote for them now nationally.
Case in point:
http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-SU08-T315.pdf
For the last full year, the Greens have enjoyed with the most accurate pollster out there (and now the only pollster who uses cold call methodology, far superior to Angus Reid’s online polls or Strategic Council tracking polls that have distorted polls that pundits and journalists use to further spin and distort).
Nationally, the Greens are polling between 7% and 11% over the last year to date. If the national average is a solid 8% year over year, (they are currently at 7%, a one point drop from Nano’s previous poll and year over year their average is just over 8%) this would mean that if the voter turnout percentage was the same as 2006 and Elizabeth May was not allowed to participate in the leadership debate, a full 8% of 14.9 million voters would not be represented.
Folks… thats 1,192,000 votes.
Herb, thats over a million voters in this nation that will go unrepresented by their party leader in the debates. To me, close 1.2 million supporters in a nation with a voting base of this size makes the Green party primetime.
To put this in to further perspective, the Bloc has enjoyed a 9% national average with just 1 percentage point more support than the Greens year over year and no one is saying “your national support is a mere 1 point more than the lowly Greens, you shouldn’t be allowed to participate in the leadership debates”.
Bottom line from where I stand is that national support percentages matter here. Again, to say that over a million Canadian votes for a party should go unrepresented in the leadership debates is to be at the least, a major stickler on “qualifications” to join the leadership debates and at the most, a blatant stonewall tactic to keep May from joining for fear that she might succeed in a major way.
Whether the motive is “least or most”, if May is not allowed to participate in the debates, over a million Canadians who are likely to vote Green will be unrepresented.
All self interests aside… do we want a democracy that excludes party leadership representation of 8% of actual voters in this nation or a million plus votes?
Garth is right. The Green party is more of a movement than a political party and for as much as people fear that the Greens could some day be a leading opposition party or actually even form a government some day or split votes and all the rest, there is such a thing as BLOWBACK from taking democratic representation away from any democracy.
My view is that if Elizabeth May participates, the other parties risk losing support from all parties straight across the board from such blowback (save one, the Libs) as the Greens are national and the environment is poised to be the solid number one issue in the future to come. Its no accident that when the environment became the number one issue in this nation that the Greens had a pop in national support.
Keep Elizabeth May from participating in the debates? The rest of the political parties in this nation will also lose (save the Liberals as they have upheld their democratic principles) and why?
Contrary to what Jennifer Smith has to say, a healthy majority of Canadians aren’t stupid (they might not be fully aware of the facts they need to make the right choices, but they aren’t stupid and oddly enough, most of us also know the difference between right and wrong genius or know. Most 6 year olds know that much). Canadians know when Democracy is being comprimised and who/what is comprimising it. The political parties and their supporters that think they win this round this time by not letting Liz participate will still lose in the end.
Even if they win, they’ll lose Herb. Politicians who blatantly lack principle and run away from challengers don’t stay in power very long. Even if they win… they’ll later lose. (and I gotta say it, Dions support of May shows courage to those who know the true definition of the word) Time and time again history has shown this. If you are on the wrong side of principle in combating a movement, it only feeds the movement (unless its a successful genocide, but thats not the case here, lol). Even if the Cons/NDP/Bloc/media succeeds in keeping May from the debates, they’ll lose.
But hey! Its only my opinion. Have a great day, Herb!
seems like the public is against taking Canada Post private…
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=18fa18f5-94f9-4db0-bd9e-7e6be83994cb
By Bill-Muskoka (not anymore) on 09.02.08 4:26 pm
Bill, not sure if you have heard this yet, but here goes.
The Wal-Marts in Alabama have completly run out of stock of ammunitions and guns for sale. One customer was asked why the need to stockpile arms. He said that Russia has invaded Georgia, and if they think of coming into Alabama they will have a bigger battle.
Lana it`s economic conditions that will bring change. Voting none of the above is only an option and so far the only option for Cdns that might bring enough change before those brutal conditions set in.
By unintended consequences on 09.02.08 3:49 pm
Wrong on both counts. Voting N.O.T.A. is not an option and does not appear anywhere on any ballot. It is in fact a cop out and dereliction of duty plus irresponsible. [But then you know all about being that].
Brutal conditions may arrive after the situations are irreversible. Vote now, and vote responsibly for the best candidate in your riding, the one that best reflects your values and ethics.
Well good news the Liberal WV SC StS C (the longest riding description ever) is having their candidate nominating committee on September 6.
By Bonnie N BC on 09.02.08 4:15 pm
I think their candidate is to be announced Saturday. No need for a candidate nominating committee as it is reported that the Liberal party will be unveiling their star candidate for the riding Saturday.
Today’s Liberal posters are sounding somewhat desperate, could it be the pressure of an election coming on. Let’s have fun and keep a level head. The world is NOT going to end even if the conservatives win or retain a small minority or if the Liberals pull of a good result.
By ST on 09.02.08 3:46 pm
LOL!!!
The only pollster in this nation (outside of the federal governments polls of which Harper, the greatest spender on government polls heaviliy believes I might add) that uses cold calls as a methodology and is therefore the only accurate pollster out there, (Nano’s polls) has the Libs leading the Cons by a 35% to 33% margin. This flies in the face of a Harper government full of scandal and an election call that has fear written all over it.
And the Libs are desparate?
LOL!!! (laughter is apparently a good thing, thanks for that, lol)
Vote now, and vote responsibly for the best candidate in your riding, the one that best reflects your values and ethics.
By Truth B Told on 09.02.08 4:49 pm
—
And by voting we simply CONTINUE this never ending circle of RUBBISH that runs this country. The ballot SHOULD have the option “None of the Above” and if that option “wins” than the government starts again, over and over and over until THEY get it right.
Hey Garth, how about proportional representation ? I never see you petitioning for that, do I.
Bring on another minority. It’s the only way things get done in this country.
http://tinyurl.com/6ajpfj
“they are the people Harpo imitates….
THAT is what is coming here if Canada is dumb enough to let that ideological thug get another minority.
BY MOLLY 09.02.08 12:31 AM
Molly,
Please, if you can, watch this video. What you’re worried about is here in Canada. This is another documentary, 1 1/2 hr. but every Canadian just has to watch this. And just a warning, this is very real, and it’s disturbing to realize it’s true already. The video begins with the well-organized opposition to NAU.
But immediately important to what you mentioned, is that it proves that our fundamental right — to be seen and heard by our elected politicians, in peaceful protest — have been taken away.
Although the film at first explores the resistance movement to what is already taking place in the North American Union Summit meetings, it’s the end of the documentary that is so important for all Canadians, to witness with their own eyes, the protests of August 2007 in Montebello, Canada, and the illegal actions that were taken by the authorities and the police. It’s all on film. Democracy is in shatters, we just aren’t being informed about it on the news. Your speculation is correct, it’s just that it’s already here. In addition, protest to globalization is already considered under terrorism. So how do we protest it? Please watch the video to the end, as the last half hour goes to your concern and shows we have already lost rights to protest.
Molly,
Sorry, I forgot to add the link:
http://tinyurl.com/58w8fq
Garth, I agree with you on most things, but this is not one of them. Every major party should be on equal footing in an election. If we want to address the problem of “stealing votes”, we need to implement preferential voting (which Stephane Dion favours, as he told a crowd in Saskatoon a week or two ago). Clearly, it’s time our electoral system matured and introduced preferential voting.
I do not disagree, but electoral reform is several general elections away, and we happen to live in this world, with this system. “Sending a signal” by voting for parties that will never form government, form opposition, or even elect a single member is a message lost. — Garth
Hmm.. sorry Mol, I’ll try again, long URL version this time:
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-1429144751008474466
Really worth seeing it through to the end. Better than any horror flick every produced, that’s for sure.
Grab the popcorn.
By Marc on 09.02.08 4:38 pm
The only thing that gets taxed by the Green Shift plan is crude refined in this nation. If its not refined, it doesn’t get taxed by the Green Shift Tax. Ralph is right in a sense that Atla won’t get hit with a tax on unrefined conventional crude going south. But the Tarsands will get hit as tarsands crude must be refined before its piped south.
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article/235930311-harpers-green-shift-tax-smear
The east is likely to pay its share as much as the west in the sense that conventional crude will be taxed at the refinery level but the actual tax will be double to triple the amount of conventional crude refineries due to the much higher levels of C02 emmissions tarsands refineries have due to the refining process of bitumen extraction with the major use of natural gas.
I do not disagree, but electoral reform is several general elections away, and we happen to live in this world, with this system. “Sending a signal” by voting for parties that will never form government, form opposition, or even elect a single member is a message lost. — Garth
By Joel SK on 09.02.08 5:05 pm
It is several elections away mainly because no party is willing to put it in its’ platform today. There is no reason why either the CPC or the Liberals could not introduce legislation within 90 days to have riding decided by 50% plus one vote.
Simple exericse really…all it takes is one leader to decide.
Actually not. When Ontario and BC decided to reform the process, they found it necessary to have exhaustive citizens assemblies, followed by referenda – in which the people rejected proposed reforms. No government or party can unilaterally change the way we elect our leaders, lest we become less democratic or citizen rights are impacted. — Garth
While many would prefer strategic voting to eliminate Harper, this does not justify not allowing Elizabeth May a fair chance to debate as leader of the Green Party. She represents close to a million Canadians and No One should be afraid to let her speak.
By Closely Watching on 09.02.08 12:36 am
I have no problem with Lizzy Mae getting to debate with all the other leaders. I will even listen to what she says. But I will not vote for her splinter party at this time or any other time. Look at how Harper did it. He used his party support to sell an amalgamation of the right to form a larger entity. This is how the Green Party can get some traction, by an internal take over of their nearest political kin. But since Harper beat her to it she is on the outside looking in! Maybe 1/2 a decade or so down the road she just might have a chance.
I hear that the Conservatives have cancelled four nomination meetings here in Nova Scotia (out of eleven) and directed their special committees to select candidates or else the candidates would be appointed by the central party. The excuse for this is that there is no time for a proper nomination although it is the Prime Minister and leader of the party that is planning to call the election. The Conservative Party leadership must think their members are stupid enough to buy that excuse for preventing the democratic functioning of their party.
By keith phibbs on 09.02.08 7:27 am
Your link isn’t working.
The east is likely to pay its share as much as the west in the sense that conventional crude will be taxed at the refinery level but the actual tax will be double to triple the amount of conventional crude refineries due to the much higher levels of C02 emmissions tarsands refineries have due to the refining process of bitumen extraction with the major use of natural gas.
By brain on 09.02.08 5:07 pm this is all very interesting but as a refinery brat from the West, I ask you how are you going to keep track of and account for all the feed stock blending that goes on, never mind the final products? There are so many ways to cheat on the rules it will be a nightmare for accountants.
The reason he was sitting as an Indie was because he ran afoul of Elections Canada, which is why Dion punted him. No slander there. Besides, I actually went to bat for the guy behind the scenes. Not that you’d care, apparently. — Garth
By Lore_Weaver on 09.02.08 1:19 pm
Isn’t clarification a wonderful thing Garth?
As I do not wish to consume a great deal of bandwith, nor do I have the time, I will add a few comments on select areas. For what it’s worth.
I think Harper is playing run and gun. Has gun, but is still up for an end run.
Methinks Dion is still sucking the hind teat. (That’s a farm term for those who have recently become sensitive.)
Neither Leader, nor either’s party has said, done or indicated anything of true value which shows insight, leadership and vision which would change my mind in any significant way from what I have thought and felt for some considerable time.
I have read some good comments, assessments and suggestions on this site recently.
Striking a balance between passionate, constructive and endless partisan blathering, I expect is a challenge.
If you wish to appeal to a thinking audience, please lay off the repetitious party cheerleading/cheerleaders. Not only are they boring, they are offensive to the mind of a free thinking, liberal minded realist. An oxymoron some would say.
I read the criticism of Harper and accusations of liar, deceiver etc. May I respectfully remind the Liberal Party of Canada that those who live in glass houses, shouldn’t say things that make me want to puke. You know why? Cause “The Parties” make me want to vote for Elizabeth May. Consequences be damned.
I am tired of people who try to manipulate my thinking. I’m smarter than you think. Noisy too, when I choose to be.
I didn’t spend all these years studying History just to lie down.
My time is up.
Power to the People!
Comrade Okie
To brain of 09.02.08 4:42 pm
Re: 1.2 million Canadians without a voice in the debates
Just how many signatures on a petition did Mr. Day of the Alliance Party propose necessary for a national referendum?
A wee bit of hypocrisy?
Actually not. When Ontario and BC decided to reform the process, they found it necessary to have exhaustive citizens assemblies, followed by referenda – in which the people rejected proposed reforms. No government or party can unilaterally change the way we elect our leaders, lest we become less democratic or citizen rights are impacted. — Garth
By wjp on 09.02.08 5:19 pm
In Ontario’s case, the reforms were poorly drafted compromises that were even more poorly marketed. Even then it was only turned down by 2 out of 3 voters, but 102 out of 107 ridings said no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_electoral_reform_referendum,_2007#Results
The lesson is: If a party or group wants to reform the electoral system, it has to be a clear, simple plan that has wide spread understanding and support. This one had less than that. Consequently electoral reform in Ontario Provincially is probably a dead issue for at least a decade.
Any idea what you might do for the campaign?
BY BONNIE N BC 09.02.08 4:15 PM
Hi Bonnie,
I had a chance, twice, to talk to my candidate at the local dinner in May and the Stampede breakfast.. our first voyages into politics — ‘to eat and participate at the same time’ — sounded like a good deal to me! I really like her, so no problem there.
Meeting Dion like we did, accidentally before the breakfast in the parking lot, I’m so glad I had that good fortune to talk to him. And I’ll tell you, he’s tall, and very cute — for what it’s worth. And Jeanine is just lovely. I feel very lucky to have met him.
I did volunteer for a candidate once when I was 18 growing up in London in ’73 but I ended up with no time to volunteer as it turned out [I had an imitation leather mini-skirt, but not any more!!]
My husband and I were just talking today about calling the candidate — I’ve never done this before so we’ll have to see what’s up. I’ll keep you posted.
This is going to be fun!
In today’s National Post, there was an excellent article by Mr. Kelly Mcparland on Stephen Harper entitled: “Harper needs to learn to play well with the other children.”
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/09/02/kelly-mcparland-harper-needs-to-learn-to-play-well-with-the-other-children
The news medias are slowly waking up?
Turning on the news – and seeing Mike Duffy (for about 5 minutes) shows clearly the Conservative mantra for this lesson: Strong Leadership. Everything they spun this way. They are breaking their fixed election dates laws for strong leadership. I nearly gagged when Dim Jim claimed Harerp was a decisive leader, after he listens to all voices. The I heard Prentice talk about strong leadership in uncertain times. Then both slammed the “massive green tax.”
If that’s all they got, they are in trouble. I’m looking forward to the Liberal campaign.
Actually not. When Ontario and BC decided to reform the process, they found it necessary to have exhaustive citizens assemblies, followed by referenda – in which the people rejected proposed reforms. No government or party can unilaterally change the way we elect our leaders, lest we become less democratic or citizen rights are impacted. — Garth
I am not too sure that STV was rejected by voters in B.C. The B.C. government in their wisdom decided not to fund, or fund much of any information for one to make an educated decision for the STV referndum. Since I was unable to find infomation for or against STV, I declined my referendum ballot as I had no business voting for something I was ignorent of. I believe it needed 60% yes to become law, and the referndum returned 58% or such. A majority of voters in B.C. wanted STV, but not the correct amount to change the law. I believe it is a referendum question once again in May 09, and hopefully more funding will be approved for someone to make an educated choice of whether or not they want such a thing.
My apology, here’s the correct link to the National Post’s article by Mr. Kelly Mcparland on Stephen Harper.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/09/02/187172.aspx
Thank you.
Garth was in fact a supporter of it when we tried, unsuccessfully, to get it passed provincially here in Ontario. It’s too bad that either B.C. or Ontario had not been successful, because it could have served as model of whether or not to implement elsewhere and Federally. Small steps …
Hi Barb,
Have you seen this interveiw yet? AMERICA: Freedom To Fascism. Aaron Russo Interview. 37min.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3254488777215293198&hl=en
BY GREG W., OAKVILLE 3:44PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi Greg,
Yes and I was just thinking about Russo yesterday when I posted something. I should watch it again. That Naomi Wolf video is very relevant too, as she gives both an historical perspective and analytical comparison to show that fascism looks like this, in the early stages, and how it creeps in to society so easily.. before it tips the balance and is too late to stop it with the checks and balances our forefathers tried to give us and warn us about. Time will tell, eh?
By Comrade Okie on 09.02.08 5:31 pm
Good post, Okie. But don’t count the runts out, since maybe the milk from the hinder most teat is sweeter! Furthermore, use the band width you need while it is still free. There maybe problems ahead with that if Harper has his way.
Finally, we need more of you to speak up regarding the lack of inspiration, leadership and rectification of the electoral flaws that we have been living with for ever.
The squawking electorate gets the olive oil. Nothing ventured, nothing gained!
Sifting out the partisan comments is something you have to do where ever you read, or listen, don’t expect or ask for any censorship……you and only you can do your own “homework”!
By brain on 09.02.08 5:07 pm
Thanks for the info. Now if you could provide the Green Shift page number that lists exemptions. I will find it difficult to support the Green shift when there are clear exemptions for the Green Shift but only Mr. Goodale etc. know where they can be located in the text of the Green Shift.
Harper Tories on the brink of majority
The Globe shows no shame to put this poll on the front page that flies in the face of all the other polls. Strategic was out in left field last time as it will be this time.
I suppose it’s who you think is more reliable. The Conservative-laden Strategic Counsel group or the non-partisan Nanos Research – the ONLY group to peg the last federal election to a “t”.
His latest numbers released last August 29th paint a very differnt story: Overall – LIBERAL 35, CP 33, NDP 17, GREEN 7 and the BQ 8. The Nanos breakdown – Atlantic: LIBERAL 54, CP 25 NDP 19 Quebec: LIBERAL 24 CP 25 BLOC 31 NDP 13 ONTARIO: LIBERAL 42 CP 29 NDP 21 GREEN 9 WEST: LIBERAL 31 CP 44 NDP 16 GREEN 8.
Elizabeth May was just on TV pleading her case for participation in the debate.Although I still believe a party should have an elected member before they’re allowed to debate her most recent TV appearance seems to indicate that she will be a great help to Harper, embarrass Dion for jumpimg into bed with her and dissolve any support she might have garnered to date.
If she continues to come across as a frumpy, loud mouthed,pushy American Earth Mother with that hard on the ears screechy voice she’ll have Canadian viewers hitting their mute buttons every time she opens her mouth.
Let her debate,even the granola & Birkenstock set will be turned off by her personna.
Oh please
Why do I even try to watch Mike Duffy Live? I always end up yelling at the TV and my Labrador starts barking thinking there’s an intruder. I know that the old Duff is supposed to entertain but what really makes me mad he tries to act like he is a reporter. Whereas, Kady O’Malley blogs are funny, sharp and less than complimentary about either party.
Okay, I’m fine, (really, I’m fine) switched the channel and now watching CBC Newsworld and Don Newman. You know “welcome to the BROAD-cast” fame. Some Conservative dude I have never seen before is talking in monotone and saying he wants to get going. Is someone on holidays – boring!
Now we have Keith Boag and Chris Hall. Good, Keith agrees with Scott Reid (sorry Scott, the beer and popcorn Martin guy) go for the jugular – it’s Stephen Harper, stupid. Chris questions the wisdom of Dion. Whatever… at least I am not yelling at the TV.
How come Don Newman doesn’t say “Goodbye to the BROADcast”?
Good to have “Politics” back on CBC…
It appears this summer the CPC have announced more than $2 BILLION++ in spending – though much of that re-announced, as well as $600 million in the past 2 weeks.
Seems the CPC were in election mode long before the phony need for meetings was declared.
- Don’t you love their honesty?
- Don’t you love a party that came to “power” promising they would not use pre-election spending as a tool?
- Don’t you love a party that “removed” the ability of the PM to schedule elections to his benefit?
This one is going to be tough folks.
Vote ABC
NOTE: to those who are trying to influence folks like me who believe in “ABC” into voting Liberal, please consider that the NDP deserve a voice, as to the Greens, etc. Vote your conscience. “Strategic voting” does not necessarily force you to vote Liberal.
Brain, love your posts.
By Molly on 09.02.08 2:01 pm
Likewise and fully agree with your suggestion to get mad. Anger is often a major component of the healing process and this nation is divided by a PM that wedges every issue for his own self gain.
By Truth B Told on 09.02.08 1:54 pm
David and TBT, excellent points.
2 of 3 pollsters are cooking the numbers due to their choice of methodology. Strategic Polling uses inferior tracking polls. Angus Reid uses inferior online polls. The only historically proven to be accurate polls are cold call polls that spread out their calls to proportionate demographics (age, sex, race, income) an there is only one pollster doing it. It was the one and same pollster who was within .1% accuracy in the 2006 election and who is it?
Nanos.
We really do have to question why the consumers of this nation put up with pollsters who cook numbers for media who takes those cooked numbers and spins them. Folks, that’s called propaganda and this nation should be above this but its not.
All media looks for profit so there isn’t much discretion in terms of who they will take their advertizing dollar from. But when it comes down to corporate board room calls in the area of media market expansion, the latest CRTC rulings are a major tell in terms of how and why Can West in particular supports the Harper party (and provincial governments that support the Harper party) so much.
But its more than money that is at stake. Leonard Asper, Can West’s CEO, is from Israel and as such, Can West is Israeli owned and controlled. The obvious pandering by Harper to support Israel’s involvement of the Israel/Lebanon conflict, going so far as to call all other opposition parties as “anti-semite” or anti Jewish couldn’t make such a connection more obscenely obvious.
As it is, Bev Oda fundraisers held by Can West have to raise eyebrows in terms of media getting in bed with political parties.
Can West bias/propaganda on behalf of the Harper party should be well known by now (but regrettably is not, if only people knew)
A wee bit of hypocrisy?
By cms on 09.02.08 5:38 pm
Yup.
I remember the best referendum ever.
To make Stockwell Day change his name to Doris Day! Love Rick Mercer.
By C. B. Innes on 09.02.08 5:26 pm
(snip)
The Conservative Party leadership must think their members are stupid enough to buy that excuse for preventing the democratic functioning of their party.
(snip)
Yunno C.B., I am actually beginning to wonder about that very thing. It seems to me the CPC core are followers, with little independent thought. If they truly were able to think for themselves:
- would they not see the betrayal in Income Trusts?
- would they not see this election call another betrayal?
- would they not question the gutter politics favored by the CPC?
- would they not see the problem with in-and-out?
The list goes on and on.
All that I have seen from the CPC followers here, and on other blogs, is adherence to the Party Line – i.e. talking points. They seem incapable, most of them, in debating an issue without making it a personal attack. Very little free thought is evident.
Add to that, they rationalize the flip flops, betrayals, and lies as one of two things:
1. the other parties did it
2. Harpo knows best
I am one of those who say the name of a once proud Canadian political organisation has been dragged through the dirt by a small group of political opportunists.
I have never seen this type of unethical behaviour in any other incarnation of the Conservative brand.
Now, if only the grassroots who are True Conservative could see that their animosity to the Liberals, NDP, or whoever you want means they are propping up a gang of thieves, then perhaps the tag “conservative” could regain some of the past pride.
Sorry, C.B., but I think their leadership has them tagged pretty good – STUPID. Please prove me wrong! Pretty please?
“Sending a signal” by voting for parties that will never form government, form opposition, or even elect a single member is a message lost. — Garth
So what you’re saying is Garth is that “some votes” matter more than others. And that I should only “vote” or stand behind a party that has a chance of winning. Is that what you’re saying?
If she continues to come across as a frumpy, loud mouthed,pushy American Earth Mother with that hard on the ears screechy voice she’ll have Canadian viewers hitting their mute buttons every time she opens her mouth.
Let her debate,even the granola & Birkenstock set will be turned off by her personna.
By Bocanut on 09.02.08 6:04 pm
Does your comment indicate that you are impressed by Harper, Layton or Dion? Perhaps Mr. Duceppe?
Please be specific, adult in the nature of your response and if you can manage it, non partisan.
Comrade Okie
“Sending a signal” by voting for parties that will never form government, form opposition, or even elect a single member is a message lost. — Garth
Garth, did you feel that way when you discussed your future with the Green Party a couple of years ago?
Not only did the employees of John Deere receive a Deere John letter, but also, that business consolidated at two plants … One in Wisconsin … the other in Mexico.
In the US, the banks are failing, one after another …
Survival of Big Florida Bank In Doubt
Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D. MONEY MARKETS 09-02-08
You should ask yourself … Is Harper in favour of globalization? Case Closed.
http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/SMR/reports/8714/87141.asp?ec=p225&sc=87141
To brain of 09.02.08 4:42 pm
Re: 1.2 million Canadians without a voice in the debates
Just how many signatures on a petition did Mr. Day of the Alliance Party propose necessary for a national referendum?
A wee bit of hypocrisy?
By cms on 09.02.08 5:38 pm
Huh? Was something announced that I missed? Where is the hypocracy? Did the PM announce that May is not going to participate in a debate – should one be actually be scheduled? You seem to have concluded that May will not participate in a debate that has not been scheduled yet for an election that has not actually been called yet. A little ahead of the game, wouldn’t you say?
There’s no logic in comparing the alleged number of Green party supporters to Day’s referenda proposal.
As lame luck would have it, just as Dion gears up to fight an election on the environemtal issue, it is the economy now that is mostly on the minds of Canadians.
It is as Monsieur Dion were to show up at a baseball game in full hocket gear!
It would have been far better if Dion had followed Garth’s advice over a year ago, and brought down this government far earlier. Now he has waited too long and appears more indecisive than ever.
At least up until now, he could attempt to appear to be the one who would decide the timing of the next election. Now even that bit of self-respect and dignity has been taken away from him, and the fellow from “the other side” (can’t bring myself to say the “C” word) is the one who appears to be in charge, and in control of the timing of the next election.
Our man said that he wouldn’t see the PM until September 9 (a decision that he should have stuck with), but now he has back-tracked on even that promise, and has dutifully gone in to see the PM to be used by him for his own partisan purposes.
It has been bungle after bungle after bungle–going from bad to worse to awful. When will it end, and where will it stop?
The new poll for The Globe and Mail-CTV News (and the Globe and Mail has traditionally been Liberal friendly) finds the country significantly more confident in the leadership abilities of “the other guy” than they are of his main rival, Stephane Dion and the Liberals.
This is heartbreaking news just at a time when courage and fortitude is needed.
Let’s go over these latest poll results.
“Who would be better when it comes to…
“Being prime minister of a majority government:
Harper: 46 per cent
Dion: 22 per cent
“Being easygoing and likeable:
Harper: 38 per cent
Dion: 29 per cent
“Standing up to the United States:
Harper: 42 per cent
Dion: 29 per cent”
Houston, WE have a problem! The good old Liberal ship is heading for the rocks, and needs an immediate and decisive course correction by leadership of vision and foresight that can tap into the issues of today rather than those of the 1990s.
you and only you can do your own “homework”!
By Truth B Told on 09.02.08 5:58 pm
Been doing my homework for some decades now. Been watching this political machine for a while too. Censoring out one level in favor of another is nothing more than manipulation of thought process. A straight up rebuttal is better than cowering behind the status quo.
What do ya think?
COMRADE,
There are over 33 million people in Canada, a big ship to turn around. I didn’t see your suggestion on how to do that, all I read in your post was apathy and that you want Garth to not allow posts. Thanks for helping Harper with apathy, that’s part of his plan. All the best to you with that.
PDF link:
http://tinyurl.com/6bzehw
from:
“Profile of Stephen Harper”
http://tinyurl.com/68ubvc
By Izzy on 09.02.08 6:47 pm
By Comrade Okie on 09.02.08 6:48 pm
I’m thinking, Harper, Flaherty, Emerson, Solberg and tous les autres got a major problem. What say youze Quemo Sabays?
Who cares about StockYard Day? I don’t.
By Barb the proofreader on 09.02.08 6:53 pm
Did my post strike a cord with you? You seem defensive.
Comrade Okie
To Seachange of 09.02.08 6:45 pm
Re: Number of ‘alleged’ supporters
THIRTY-NINTH GENERAL ELECTION 2006 TABLE 9/TABLEAU 9 TRENTE-NEUVIÈME ÉLECTION GÉNÉRALE 2006
OFFICIAL VOTING RESULTS RÉSULTATS OFFICIELS DU SCRUTIN
Percentage of valid votes by political affiliation
Pourcentage des votes valides par appartenance politique
Green Party of Canada
Le Parti Vert du Canada
4.5%
The Alliance’s direct democracy proposals would have required a referendum on any proposal supported by a petition signed by 3% of Canadian voters
Dimitri Soudas: “When it comes to the debate, they can have May or they can have Dion,” he said. “But they can’t have both.”
Seachange, I think the parallels are very clear between the Alliance binding referendum via a petition and 4.5% of valid votes cast in the last election for the Green Party. What higher form of endorsement for an issue or party is there besides a vote cast in a federal election? This, coupled with the fact that she technically has a Member of Parliament, should be enough. Mr. Manning was also allowed into the 1993 debates when Deborah Grey was the only Reform Party MP.
What are people so afraid of?
Did the PM announce that May is not going to participate in a debate – should one be actually be scheduled?
By Seachange on 09.02.08 6:45 pm
So the PM gets to decide that too? I don’t think so. He is a PM, not a King. Apparently it is up to the media bigwigs. They would do well to consider that over 75% of Canadians (according to a poll) think the Green Party should have a voice in national debates. That’s a lot of consumers.
Hmm.. sorry Mol, I’ll try again, long URL version this time:
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-1429144751008474466
Really worth seeing it through to the end. Better than any horror flick every produced, that’s for sure.
Grab the popcorn.
By Barb the proofreader on 09.02.08 5:07 pm
Best video I’ve seen on the SPP/NAU, thanks Barb. But it was Paul Martin with the Liberal party that began it all for fear of trade between the borders after 9/11; the standardization to the lowest common denominator is happening right now, right under our noses. We’re F*^$*&!
Graham Richardson’s question to the brave chap standing in the front of the police line near the end was so lame, what a bonehead.
I’ll never eat jelly beans again, send them all to the PMO’s office.
BY WJP 09.02.08 10:20 AM
Within your proposal, how do I vote for the prime minister of choice if that is most important to me?
COMRADE,
Nope.
TR PETROBITCH on 09.02.08 6:44 pm
“The U.S. government is pumping in massive amounts of cash and bail-out money to rescue banks, brokers, giant mortgage lenders and the entire economy.
And despite any temporary setbacks, that money has been driving up the one sector where demand remains strong but supplies are limited: Natural resources”
This is almost too funny when you consider this guy is actually trying to make a buck from this twisted bit of lodgic.
He recognized back in 2005 the economy was in trouble and recommenced stocks to stay away from. Who didn`t know the American economy was in trouble in 2005. When consumers are mortgaged to the hilt, savings at 0 and the credit cards max out along with declining real estate values the answer is obvious. Consumers run out of spending power, the overall economy heads down, who couldn`t figure that out.
He mentions as the American economy retracts so does demand which is how he made his first picks, not rocket science.
He`s what he missed. The global economic expansion was all based on a strong American economy. When it reversed commodities became the hedge of choice against a falling dollar. There is no demand for commodities, the high prices have nothing to do with, as he states, demand.
Previously I`ve said as the American economy has enough fluctuations to indicate a bottom is near commodities will drop dramatically. Currently there is a very good example of this going on.
“demand remains strong but supplies are limited”
It was only a few threads ago I posted links to a global oversupply as reported by the producers.
the melt is on
BY WJP 09.02.08 10:20 AM
Within your proposal, how do I vote for the prime minister of choice if that is most important to me?
By Barb the proofreader on 09.02.08 7:20 pm
You don’t just as you don’t now, your vote goes to the local independent, all those elected in your province depending on the size get to vote in their allotted number into the cabinet, the cabinet chooses the PM from among its’ number and that choice must be ratified by the majority of all the elected members. No one will know who the PM will be until he is chosen by the cabinet.
I don’t think people seem to understand that the Green Shift is a plan for both the environment AND the economy. It’s a big ass package that touches on many different areas.
Why people keep on thinking that the two have to be mutually exclusive is beyond me. There is going to be a debates on both issues I am sure, and I personally think Dion has an upper hand with this plan. He just has to get the general public on board.
Oh and releasing some information on other successes of a carbon tax somewhere else would be nice too. If there isn’t any… well then there is going to be problems. And I would personally like to know why they have failed (if they have).
The premise seems sound to me. It’s the implementation and coordination of the plan that could go wrong. So do it right
If she continues to come across as a frumpy, loud mouthed,pushy American Earth Mother with that hard on the ears screechy voice she’ll have Canadian viewers hitting their mute buttons every time she opens her mouth.
Let her debate,even the granola & Birkenstock set will be turned off by her personna.
By Bocanut on 09.02.08 6:04 pm
I wondered how long it would take someone to start the typical ant-American and sexist comments in reference to the female voice.
That does not excuse the poor taste that Garth has used in selecting an extremely unflattering picture of Ms May to place beside a flattering one of the Liberal leader.
I did not select the photos. They were distributed together by Canadian Press after each leader posed for photos in their duds at the Calgary Stampede. Stop with the conspiracy theory already. — Garth
No government or party can unilaterally change the way we elect our leaders, lest we become less democratic or citizen rights are impacted. — Garth
By wjp on 09.02.08 5:19 pm
But one party can unilaterally ignore electorial and parlimentry rules and conventions without censure to the point of ignoring their own legislation when it suits!
Untill our MPs put the protection of our parlimentry demorcracy at the top of their ajenda any othere discussion is largly a waste of breath.
This email was sent to my daughter’s email account today (where I’m babysitting). She is not a New Democrat. I wonder how they got her email address?
My fellow New Democrat,
Did you hear the news this weekend? Jack Layton met with Stephen Harper. As Jack told me, Harper seems intent on quitting his job.
Let there be no doubt, an election’s coming very soon.
The good news is that Jack Layton intends on applying for that job. And it’s about time you have a Prime Minister that’ll put you and your family first.
But there’s a lot of work to do – and we have to get started now. That’s why I’m writing to you to ask you to make a special snap-election donation right now.
The Conservative attack machine is already running ads across the country. They’re trying to gloss over how Stephen Harper turned his back on today’s families.
We can’t let him go unchecked. New Democrats need to be fast out of the gate – the moment the election’s called.
Your immediate snap-election donation will help us hit the ground running. Your gift of $134, $328 – or whatever you can afford – will go right into our national advertising fund. You’ll give Jack Layton’s team of New Democrats a huge opening week push.
I can’t tell you how important this election’s going to be. Together, we’ll change the way things are done in Ottawa.
Together, we’ll put you and your family first. Ahead of the big polluters. Ahead of the big banks and cell phone giants.
For too long, Stephen Harper has listened to those sitting around the boardroom tables, not the kitchen tables. This is our chance to change politics in Canada. Please make your snap-election donation right now.
Éric Hébert-Daly
Election Headquarters of
Jack Layton’s New Democrats
P.S. A special contribution of $1,100 would put you among the top political donors in Canada, and it only costs you $508 after the tax credit. If you’re able to make this maximum donation, we’ve never needed it more than now. Of course, any amount goes a long way toward taking on Stephen Harper.
wjp – you make about as much sense as pjw.
It has been bungle after bungle after bungle–going from bad to worse to awful. When will it end, and where will it stop?
By Izzy on 09.02.08 6:47 pm
Who cares about StockYard Day? I don’t.
By PYOTR PETROBITCH on 09.02.08 6:57 pm
Re: Izzy’s comment. It gives me no pleasure to say, “I told them so”.
Re: Stocky: Pot Roast. Needs a really good cook to make it palatable.
Untill our MPs put the protection of our parlimentry demorcracy at the top of their ajenda any othere discussion is largly a waste of breath.
By rural on 09.02.08 7:40 pm
I tend to agree with your view, nothing is more important than to bring the process back to the constituency and the voter. We have gone for years with Libs, Cons, Libs, Cons, Libs, CPC and with each new government the power has incremently moved from the people to the PMO. I understand why party leaders would not want to change that, but I cannot understand why the electorate continues to support the status quo, and if I am not mistaken, the numbers of those who vote is continually falling. Then one day, we shall wake up and find people in government who are opposed to democracy and those things we generally value and we will wonder how on earth they ever got there. When we worry now about citizen’s rights being impacted, what will we think then…we should have done something? Well this election is an opportunity for a party to make a stand on democratic reform, maybe place their reputation on it, but we have the most independent and democratic MP in my riding, and if he won’t go for it now, I hold little hope for anyone in the PMO or anyone interested in attaining that position in even considering now or in the future. I guess as my good friend R says, it will take unintended consequences for it to happen.
I’ve long had a real problem with the big leadership convention method of choosing party leaders – while it is on the surface as democratic as all get out, it has 3 big downsides. They are:
1 – it costs so much to get the job that the winner is left with debts that no honest man can pay
2 – because of these debts, the winner becomes beholden to whosoever paid the bills and lined up the votes, and
3 – the leader is able through the whip system to ride roughshod over the MPs.
The net result is that while democracy appears to be served, instead it is rendered irrelevant.
I often wonder if democracy is doomed in this country, or if 160 MPs will one day find it within themselves to revolt and restore it.
By bunny on 09.02.08 7:55 pm
Thank you for the compliment…
Garth, while I realize that the political “experts” who divide the parties into left/right camps might look at the Green party as possibly taking away potential Liberal votes, I offer another opinion.
Look very closely at the Green platform. In that platform, alongside of a revenue neutral tax shift, with decreases to income and payroll taxes, we have income splitting, higher tax breaks for charitable donations, debt reduction, eliminating corporate subsidies and rescinding taxes on income trusts.
These are things that many small-c conservatives believe strongly in. I suspect that given the chance to illustrate her party’s platform nationally , Elizabeth May will have just as much, if not more appeal to voters who would otherwise lean Conservative. Her party’s performance could also work very much to Liberals advantage.
Secondly…it seems you would be conceding the fact that she would gain votes by being in the debate. I would have expected you to have more confidence that Stephane Dion would be able to take votes away from May and the others
As for the idea of strategic voting…I wholeheartedly reject it. I will vote for the best candidate and party platform regardless of who’s going to win the election. To do otherwise would be to take one step towards a two-party, lesser of two-evils system like the US. We need multiple parties to ensure we have a democracy that is inclusive and continually invigorated with new ideas. If the Greens were not a factor, I am certain that Dion would not have proposed a tax shift, which is the right policy at the right time for Canada as we head into peak oil.
By William Laidlaw on 09.02.08 8:16 pm
I feel about the same way. Mr. Dion unfortunatly has a large debt to repay his leadership convention spending. Garth explained where the money gets spent etc, but I have a hard time thinking that a person who is personally burdened by a large debt, can be the leader of our country. If he is in such personnal debt, where will Canada be taken with him at the helm?
I did not select the photos. They were distributed together by Canadian Press after each leader posed for photos in their duds at the Calgary Stampede. Stop with the conspiracy theory already. — Garth
That excuse does not become you.
Are you trying to tell us that the Canadian Press decides what photos you will use on your blog? I don’t think so. You selected those photos to suit your political spin.
A number of years ago there was a provincial premier that was disliked by certain media photographers for some reason that I no longer recall. They produced a whole range of rather unflattering pictures that his opponents gleefully used against him.
The media can be master manipulators but politicians have to be responsible for their own actions.
These were the most recent photos moved on the Canadian Press wire of these two leaders taken the same day in the same location. I didn’t dress them. — Garth
This naïve woman needs some help again. Please tell me why, if Harper goes to the GG to ask her to dissolve parliament, she can’t say “NO” because that is against the law? If I am not mistaken, this is the first time Canada has had a law for a permanent election every four years. She would be setting a precedent and the law is also a precedent. She could tell Harper he can continue on until October 2009 or she can ask the opposition to form a coalition government. How can Harper be allowed to openly break the law? Are we not a country of laws? Or is this so-called law just a sham? I cannot understand why every MP is planning an election when it is supposedly against the law? Or are the laws just for the common folk?
How come Don Newman doesn’t say “Goodbye to the BROADcast”?
Too busy advertising the full-length Politics PODcast
By brain on 09.02.08 5:07 pm this is all very interesting but as a refinery brat from the West, I ask you how are you going to keep track of and account for all the feed stock blending that goes on, never mind the final products? There are so many ways to cheat on the rules it will be a nightmare for accountants.
By Truth B Told on 09.02.08 5:29 pm
Yeah, I thought of that and this why right now as we speak, the Green Shift Tax plan is being tweaked (which for some reason the Harperites have criticized. I fail to see any kind of plan as being successful in the long run while at the same time not being adaptable to changing economic variables. It ranks right up there with one of the dumbest things I’ve heard today to criticize a plan like this for not being flexible to some variables at the very least)
If a carbon tax is put on crude at the refinery level, we have to seriously look at the percentages of crude that are leaving this nation unrefined and untaxed.
Further, we have to look at the actual tax cost per barrel of refined crude that is imported.
Currently, the oil/tarsands are producing 1.1 billion barrels of oil per day out of 2.7 BOE pd pie of crude oil and oil equivalent Canadian exports. Again, the biggest C02 refinery polluters are the tarsands refineries by a minimum 2:1 margin over conventional crude refineries and thats due to the consumption of natural gas to heat up tarsands bitumen for extraction.
Currently, Canada has a 2.1 million BOE pd conventional crude refining capacity that is 98% used (the number is 100,000 BOE pd below total Canadian oil consumption, explained by the reality that approx. 100,000 BOE of conventional crude per day is of a such a high quality variety that it doesn’t need to be refined, straight from the ground). Harperites argue that the cost of refining will go up approximately 40% overall due to the GreenShift Tax plan. Is a 40% number even applicable to the isolated refinery sector separate from the rest of the oil industry including the pumps?
http://www.centreforenergy.com/FactsStats/statistics.asp?template=5,0
14 Billion worth of tax revenue from the Green Shift plan added onto a 37.9 Billion dollar refinery export pie (2006 stat) works out to 27% without factoring in the reality that the industry 5 years from now will have grown as much as 15%. (Harper can’t even get this number right if he isolates the direct refining cost on the refining sector isolated from the rest of the oil market)
But… the big whopper of a lie is that Harperites extrapolated this cost of refining jump to amount to a 40% increase at the pumps and thats about as bald faced a lie as it gets.
If refineries currently owned by the largest oil corps in the world were not currently owned by the largest oil corps in the world, I’d say the Green Tax Shift would be in trouble as clearly, there will be a dramatic cost escalation concentrated in the refinery sector from a Green Tax in a bid to force spending on C02 sequestering. However (and its a big however) since the corp owners of all the refineries in Canada are in all aspects of oil from exploration and production to refining to transport to distribution at the pumps, the cost of crude production, delivery and distribution at the pumps, the integrated cost of producing and distributing a refined BOE goes up 2% for tarsands refined crude and .5 to 1% for conventional refined crude (based on a $100 BOE) which, to anyone that has working Gr. 4 math knows that a 2% or $2 dollar increase on a hundred dollar BOE on the pricy refined tarsands crude does not translate in a 40% increase at the pumps the way the lying Harper party claims.
And I have to tell everyone with all sincerity that to make such a claim, the Harper party is either telling one of the biggest election campaign whoppers of a lie ever told to win an election (like the link below, all propaganda I might add)
http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20080901%2fgreen_shift_080902
or the Harperites are so grossly inept to make such a false claim that either way, they should be skidded out of office regardless of whatever reality it might be! Considering the other lies and scandals the Harper party has pulled, its not hard to extrapolate just how truthworthy this Harper government is.
And competant? We are likely to have 20 deaths plus from a Listeria outbreak by the 7 dead in Walkerton from the water filtration deregulatin’ Two Tier Tony Clements Mike Harris discard and truth denier Gary Fritz (current health and agricultural ministers) from the deregulation of the meat inspection industry turning over meat inspections to corporate/private self inspections, not to mention 70 dead Canadian soldiers due to Harpers love for unnecessary military offensives in Afghan.
To witness this government plant close to 100 Canadians in the growd with such incompetance makes me shake my head as to why the Harper party has 33% of the national vote according to the ownly accurate pollster in Canada. (but then… considering the media propaganda this nation is onslaughted with on a daily basis by Can West and CTV alone not to mention highly inaccurate polling in this nation that feeds such propaganda frenzy, it really doesn’t surprise me all that much)
As for the east/west comparison on who will pay more at the refinery level, its close to equal now with tarsands refineries producing 1.1 BOE of tarsands crude per day compared to the 2.1 BOE of imported crude refined in Eastern Canada, but with tarsands crude producing more than twice the levels of C02 emissions than refining conventional crude.
Eastern Canada imports 2.1 mil BOE of crude pd to supply most of Canada’s consumption needs and the cost of refining 2.1 BOE pd of imported crude compared to the cost of refining 1.1 BOE of tarsands crude is is roughly at par (since tarsands crude has more than double the C02 emissions that conventional crude refining has per refined BOE) creating roughly a 55% west vs 45% east refinery tax load at a $40 per tonne of C02 level.
But lets keep one thing crystal clear as well concerning West vs east Green Shift tax loads. Virtually all of the tarsands crude is sold to the U.S. that is majority produced and pipelined by U.S. corporations. Logic dictates that some of the Green Shift tax can be downloaded onto the U.S. importer and the U.S. obviously doesn’t want to pay the extra $2 bucks on a barrel tax so… who else would they lobby but the U.S. multinational lobbyist former NCC Prez Steve Harper that never gave up his old job? (Yo Steve!) And why is Obama saying he’ll put a tariff on “dirty oil”? (folks, they know a C02 tax is coming, existing governments are talking about doing it themselves, but its the big squabble on who will pay for it so out comes the lies by teh corporate bought lobbyists, in Canada, its “Yo Steve”)
As the tarsands continues to ramp up their production of tarsands refined crude, the west will end up paying more for their crude oil than the east over time. (tarsands crude production is expected to reach 1.6 mil BOE pd by 2016)
But…
The growing disporportionate refinery tax paid at the tarsands crude level can be offset if the industry simply cleans up its act and in the long run, C02 sequestering is to their advantage fiscally with the use of CO2 extracting oil out of depleted wells. Since C02 is a valuable resource in restarting depleted oil pools for further extraction up to 10%, one would think oil companies would want to sequester C02 but its the cost of initial startup and cuts into immediate quarterlies that makes them shy away from any initiative to do whats morally, environmentally and commonsensically right.
Sources:
http://www.centreforenergy.com/FactsStats/statistics.asp?template=5,0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves
http://www.oilandgasinalberta.ca/oilandgas.asp?href=/silos/oil/generator.asp?xml=/silos/oil/oilOverview09XML.asp&menu=0,8&template=PrinterFriendly
(click onto charts on link above)
Enjoy your evening, TBT.
By William Laidlaw on 09.02.08 8:16 pm
I’ve long had a real problem with the big leadership convention method of choosing party leaders – while it is on the surface as democratic as all get out, it has 3 big downsides. They are:
1 – it costs so much to get the job that the winner is left with debts that no honest man can pay. – William Dahl
You mean to say, no financially unsuccessful man can pay?
2 – because of these debts, the winner becomes beholden to whosoever paid the bills and lined up the votes, and – William Dahl
Not sure what you mean by that either. Dion for example, has consolidated his leadership debts to one bank. Banks most certainly dictate ones financial affairs but can they dictate the way one lives his life to the degree of influencing political policy? Your point might not be 100% accurate here depending on who owes who.
3 – the leader is able through the whip system to ride roughshod over the MPs.
The net result is that while democracy appears to be served, instead it is rendered irrelevant.
I often wonder if democracy is doomed in this country, or if 160 MPs will one day find it within themselves to revolt and restore it.
Depends on the leader. Harper for example, claims there are dissident Lib MP’s rebellious to Dion’s leadership. They never claim who or how many, just claim that Dion doesn’t have control. If thats true, your assertion that the Lib party whip runs roughshod over MP’s is false. If Harperite claims are false, conversely the implication is that the Harper party standard in terms of control of its MP is iron fisted, meaning you are right with what you say. Either way, whether the Harper party claims are true or false, to get our MP’s free of totaltarianism and our Canada back, the Harper party must go!
Mr. Manning was also allowed into the 1993 debates when Deborah Grey was the only Reform Party MP.
What are people so afraid of?
By cms on 09.02.08 7:06 pm
Darn right, CMS. There’s a precident here and if the media consortium goes the route of censorship, I can see a strong case for May in court and even if she doesn’t win there, the Green movement will pick up steam. Broken principles like this one most definitely don’t fly well with Canadians. It could be extrapolated that proof is already in the near doubled support the Greens presently enjoy from the last election. If May is censored, I’d say this will feed the Green movement.
Offering further, I’d like to add that I can see both the Libs and Greens growing their base side by side for a minimum of 5 years before they have to directly compete with each other. The reason why I say that is where the Greens poll strongest. Its not out east or in the Atlantic but out west, particularly in Alberta. It’ll take decades before Albertans vote Liberal/NDP again but if Harper stumbles (and he has. Only the naive, ignorant and liars would say he hasn’t) and considering the serious environmental issues Alta truly has with the oil patch concerning methane coalbed and tarsands, melting Harper party support will run into the Green cup.
Green prospects out west look great for them while Liberal prospects look great in Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic Canada and to a smaller extent Manitoba and BC.
So this is the way that Elizabeth May rewards Stephane Dion after he gave her the seat of Central Nova on a silver platter?
He kindly chooses not to run a Liberal candidate against her, and in return, she steals another one of his Liberal MPs on top of the one he graciously withheld from running against her.
This is a case of political bungling and ineptitude on all sides, and this (unfortunately) is what is keeping the CONS in power. It is time to wake up!
Is this one of the reasons why Harper wants an election so bad.
Canada’s economy will slow to a crawl: OECD
The OECD has chopped its outlook for Canada for 2008 and now predicts the national economy will expand at the second slowest pace in the industrialized world.
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development said Tuesday Canada’s economy will expand by only 0.8 per cent for the year, down from its previous prediction for annual growth of 1.2 per cent.
Only Italy, which the international organization forecasts to grow by a feeble 0.5 per cent, would perform worse than Canada among the G7 economies if the prediction holds. ………………………..
No one will know who the PM will be until he is chosen by the cabinet.
BY WJP 09.02.08 7:30 PM
Thanks WJP. I understand what you are saying, but knowing in advance who will be prime minister if my vote counts, means a lot to me so I was saying that I vote locally for who I would like to see nationally. That would be a flaw in the system for me is a deal breaker. Any alternatives?
I just read that both Emerson and O’Hearn are not running in the next federal election. Two Tories down, hopefully, many more to go…
My apology – my post should have read Emerson and Hearn. I have wondered how so many well-intentioned people elected as Conservatives can run under that banner again knowing they face further suffocation of their voices and views if re-elected. It must be incredibly frustrating to many of them – please tell me it can’t be simply for the benefits…
By Marc on 09.02.08 6:01 pm
I’ll take a look Marc.
Yes Emerson and Hearn, what is left in Cabinet are almost all Reform Party loyalists. The two senior guys have left, two that were not Reformers. A vote for Harper is truly a vote for Reform, not the PC Party or the CPC. Those who followed those parties are long gone or are leaving.
By Izzy on 09.02.08 10:24 pm
How many monikers did you use today Buddy? Just wonderin’.
Please tell me why, if Harper goes to the GG to ask her to dissolve parliament, she can’t say “NO” because that is against the law? If I am not mistaken, this is the first time Canada has had a law for a fixed election. She would be setting a precedent and the law is also a precedent. She could tell Harper he can continue on until October 2009 or she can ask the opposition to form a coalition government.
How can Harper be allowed to openly break the law? Are we not a country of laws? Or is this so-called law just a sham? I cannot understand why every MP is planning an election when it is supposedly against the law? Or do the opposition parties really want an election at this time so they don’t protest?
By K Murphy on 09.02.08 10:37 pm
I guess they are both smart enough to realize they would not get re-elected. I, for one, will be watching NL politics closely. Should prove interesting.
Headline: “Wolves prefer fishing to hunting”?
Interesting how that applies to politics, especially at this time. (the 4 legged creature is a thing of utmost beauty – but NOT the 2 legged example that deems itself omnipotent.(Harper & Comp.)
One only has to read the headlines of today – and ask – Which side of the coin does Harper’s New Conservative Party always choose?
{Sept. 2/08 (G&M) CALGARY – More than half a century after Canadian soldiers helped test atomic weapons during the Cold War, the federal government is acknowledging their sacrifice and is offering compensation. BUT ‘Atomic Veterans’ criticize compensation as ‘pathetic’.}
LOOKS LIKE VOTE BUYING – and don’t ever doubt that experiments on humans take place at the whim of a certain type of ‘Strong
Leadership’.
{Sept.2/08 (Canadian Press) Investors ask Supreme Court of Canada to consider appeal of ABCP plan. “…frozen for about a year…” a rescue plan that does not address their interests”…”much of it held by Canadian pension plans”…”been in the works since last September, headed by Bay Street lawyer Purdy Crawford who was hired by a group of pension funds and financial intermediaries to devise a solution for the trouble assets”…” disadvantaged by the restructuring plan, especially because it removes their right to sue in all instances except certain circumstances of fraud. They are also not being compensated for having to wait to get their money or sell the notes at a discount”…}
What entails ‘certain circumstances’? DID FRAUD TAKE PLACE? (Who decides?)
{Sept. 2/08 (Canada.c..) TORONTO – After almost 100 years of manufacturing farm equipment in Canada, the world’s No. 1 tractor maker is calling it quits here. JOHN DEERE TO CLOSE…one of the largest employers in Welland…800 jobs lost…”}
PLUS the effects of hobbled consuming of every kind, and additional cost to taxpayers.
{Sept.2/08 (Can.Press) Worst of Listeriosis outbreak may be over… “We are starting to see light at the end of the tunnel, as it were,” said federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz.}
Of course… with an election on the horizon, this WOULD be the case because we all know that bacteria read the media and follow the dictate of the dictators… and, what about salmonella? and, what about the enacting of the recommendations that the inquest/inquiry of WALKERTON highlighted? Wouldn’t YOU just love to be able to see 70 days into the future? A fantastic crystal ball, that is.
{Sept.2/08 (Ass.Press) Thai Protesters flout premier’s state of emergency “While Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej sought to tamp down newly violent unrest pitting pro- and anti-government protesters, he also was hit by an electoral commission finding that could disband his party and bar him from politics…” “for fraud during elections last year…” “decree gives the military the right to restore order, allows authorities to suspend civil liberties, bans public gatherings of more than five people and bars the media from reporting news that “causes panic.”}
This “electoral commission finding” has to be front and center in the mind of the New Conservative Government of Canada – the populace honing in and protesting – LOUDLY – on what their democracy is SUPPOSED to be. That example of “strong leadership” needs to be stamped out, intelligently, with every vote.
Vote strategically or all is gone.
For Barb the proofreader:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fNqIdiuoV4&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sTL4lcPFF0&NR=1
Don’t know if you caught these but just in case you haven’t
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzJmTCYmo9g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptzml1qQvZE&feature=related
Garth,
A question for you.
It is speculated that the election call will be on Sunday, Sept. 7. Is it legal to do this on a Sunday? Just asking.
Yes. — Garth
The media can be master manipulators but politicians have to be responsible for their own actions.
These were the most recent photos moved on the Canadian Press wire of these two leaders taken the same day in the same location. I didn’t dress them. — Garth
BY C. B. INNES ON 09.02.08 9:12 PM
Are you seriously saying that Garth is manipulating the public because of a bad photo of May?
Come on now. Let’s not get over dramatic here. It may not be flattering, but how that picture could somehow change someones perception of Elizabeth May is quite silly.
There are better things to argue than a bad pic.
And not to be to blunt about it, I some how doubt you would be crying if he chose a bad pic of harper.
Thanks WJP. I understand what you are saying, but knowing in advance who will be prime minister if my vote counts, means a lot to me so I was saying that I vote locally for who I would like to see nationally. That would be a flaw in the system for me is a deal breaker. Any alternatives?
By Barb the proofreader on 09.02.08 10:34 pm
Yes Barb, that is why I favor the Primary Election System similar to what Americans have, because we then get to vote on who will be the nominee. Simple first past the post direct voting for your choice for the nomination for party leader and local candidate(s). Then you get to support your choice in the main election later, or change horses if you really dislike who got the nomination nod! It does not have to be a Presidential style of government, it can and should be applied to Parliamentary election systems, too! This has the added bonus of including all of the general public, not just party members, thus raising interest and participation in the democratic process. And Comrade Okie would have known this if he had been reading my postings all along!
Currently, Canada has a 2.1 million BOE pd conventional crude refining capacity that is 98% used (the number is 100,000 BOE pd below total Canadian oil consumption, explained by the reality that approx. 100,000 BOE of conventional crude per day is of a such a high quality variety that it doesn’t need to be refined, straight from the ground).
By brain on 09.02.08 9:39 pm
I think that you are miss-informed on that one. Even the light gravity, sweet crudes from both Turner Valley and the Grand Prairie deep well fields need to be cleaned, fractionated, and desulfurized!
The process of cracking the medium and heavy distillates still occurs, too to raise the gasoline and solvent yeilds, plus the kerosene and light gas-oil fractions for the Jet Fuels and diesel blends may also be enhanced. those crudes have a much lower residual asphalt and bunker “C” content that they normally would probably just ship them out to a heavy oil upgrader facility or to the coast for ships. In the Eastern and central Prairies from the shallower wells there is far heavier gravity crudes, some of which have very low gasoline contents, and also pump more salt water plus sediment. This brine is locked into the crude and released in the “treaters” using very high voltage electrode potentials and steam heat to break the static-electric forces. This brine and sediment is called B.S. & W. that must be pumped back down hole to a strata that is compatible. [Conservation Authority prevents poisoning water well strata which can be as deep as 100 to 150' or more in some areas.]
Some fields have much higher sulfur contents and are not as profitable due to their “sour” rating and cost of cleaning the fractions. The solvent fraction [varsol] before desulfurization is about the color of apple juice or cider at Lloydminster, with a small adjacent fraction of “polymer” that is insoluable and looks like tobacco juice in the bottom of the gallon jug [purloined on 4-12 shift!] Yet 45 miles away at Wainwright the crude is not so black -more of a bluey green with out any polymer but some considerable paraffin wax content. There happens to be a paraffin refinery in Scarborough, Ont. just North of 401 East of Kennedy and South of Sheppard, hidden in back where you would not expect it. They quadruple distill to make every thing from food jar sealing to floor and car waxes. That all comes out of oil wells, not bee hives!
Now the rest of the story: I have read that only 2% of the World’s CO2} emissions come from Canada, and that only 40% of Canada’s portion is from the Fort Mac area refineries. Yet I also read the over 50% of the world’s forests (trees) have been cut down and not repalnted since the start of the Industrial Age. TREES are the natural CO2} capture and sequestration mechanism. This is where I think the problem and the solution lies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
About half of the mature tropical forests, between 750 to 800 million hectares of the original 1.5 to 1.6 billion hectares that once covered the planet have fallen.[5] The forest loss is already acute in Southeast Asia, the second of the world’s great biodiversity hot spots. Much of what remains is in the Amazon basin, where the Amazon Rainforest covered more than 600 million hectares. The forests are being destroyed at a pace tracking the rapid pace of human population growth. Unless significant measures are taken on a world-wide basis to preserve them, by 2030 there will only be ten percent remaining [2][5] with another ten percent in a degraded condition.[2] 80 percent will have been lost and with them the irreversible loss of hundreds of thousands of species.[2]
Now you tell me why I should get bent out of shape over our portion of the problem when it is in fact a World Wide problem that requires smarter men in government than we have now to negotiate and deliver scientifically sound plans to remediate the true problems INTERNATIONALLY! When we have a bush league druggie generation in charge, I just shake my head and close my wallet! (I am from that rare generation born of war hysteria in 1940)
Did the PM announce that May is not going to participate in a debate – should one be actually be scheduled?
By Seachange on 09.02.08 6:45 pm
So the PM gets to decide that too? I don’t think so. He is a PM, not a King. Apparently it is up to the media bigwigs. They would do well to consider that over 75% of Canadians (according to a poll) think the Green Party should have a voice in national debates. That’s a lot of consumers.
By Lana on 09.02.08 7:09 pm
Lana, I stand corrected and you reiterate what Garth said in that the broadcaster sponsoring the debate gets to call the tune. The PM does not personally decide who participates.
That is, however, beside the point I was attempting to make. Note I did not give an opinion on whether or not Elizabeth May should be included in a leadership debate, only that conclusion that she would not was being prematurely drawn since she has NOT been excluded from a debate that has not been scheduled due to an election that has not yet been called.
I was simply trying to calm a bit of hysteria.
For the record, I would like to see her included in any leadership debate that may occur but I hope, given the number of participants, that the rules of debate will be strictly enforced because the debacle that we witnessed between Martin, Duceppe, Layton and Harper was just really crappy television and nobody got to hear anything about anything!
I did not, in any way, intend to slight those who subscribe to the philosophy of the Green Party. Inasmuch as I have and defend my political convictions, I defend the right of everyone else to have theirs.
However misguided. That’s democracy.
Thanks WJP. I understand what you are saying, but knowing in advance who will be prime minister if my vote counts, means a lot to me so I was saying that I vote locally for who I would like to see nationally. That would be a flaw in the system for me is a deal breaker. Any alternatives?
By Barb the proofreader on 09.02.08 10:34 pm
Well it may not be your choice and I can understand that, however the present system is no better, in fact, it is as close to undemocratic as can be…parachuting candidates into ridings, leader appointed candidates, money from the party (never quite sure of the source), then once an MP is elected, being told how to vote from the PMO…right now you cannot chose your PM, only the party…if the plan I suggested does not work, maybe we can alter some parts of it but essential is the people of the riding choose the candidate, they are financed all the same way, they can be recalled, I would like to see a 50% plus one method of selection, and when they get to Ottawa, no one tells them how they shall vote. While at the moment, you have no vote for the PM, in reality, that is all you have right now. Your local candidate votes as he/she is told, so under this present system, why not just have Harper, Dion, Layton, Duceppe & May run and junk the other 303 candidates. The committees have been poisoned by the CPC booklet…so their life is limited, the senate will soon be history…sorry, while I understand your preference to see who the PM will be in advance of voting, your input the day after the election has all but vanished.
By SJ on 09.02.08 11:37 pm,
What I was saying is that someone in the Canadian Press, who does not like Elizabeth May, is using the picture to promote a negative image. Yes, it has been done to Harper and the Conservatives have been doing it to Dion.
Does that may it in good taste? Of course not, but it does reflect the nastiness that has become the focus of Canadian politics.
You can defend this kind of politics and media “get even” attitude all you want but you will never convince me that any of it is in good taste. In fact, I believe that at every opportunity we should be calling politicians on this kind of behaviour not encouraging it.
She dressed herself. Give it up. — Garth
Brain:
I’m sorry my imagery is causing you grief. I took the debt line from Bruce Springsteen’s song Atlantic City, it was not meant to be taken literally.
I do stand by my assertion that the big convention model actually facilitates the selection of the leader by the back-room boys (another image) while giving the illusion of grass-roots democracy.
I’ve seen it in action in the labour movement, including what happens when the selectee doesn’t do as the selectors desire. It wasn’t pretty.
As for the power of the leader through the Whips – it is most definitely there – even if a particular leader may not choose to exercise it.
If you haven’t read Lynne Olson’s Troublesome Young Men, I strongly recommend that you do. I found it very illuminating with very strong parallels to our present situation in this country.
Love your posts – there’s plenty of food for thought there.
I did not, in any way, intend to slight those who subscribe to the philosophy of the Green Party. Inasmuch as I have and defend my political convictions, I defend the right of everyone else to have theirs.By Seachange 1:12 am
Your post did not, in my opinion, slight anyone, at least not me. I will not be voting for the Green Party this time. I did in the last election, but this time I’m voting Liberal. In my riding, a Liberal MP winning is a sure thing, so I wanted to throw some support to the Green Party, and I haven’t voted Conservative since the PC party died.
I think the discussion about whether May should be in the debates resulted because that is the subject of Garth’s post, and it is obviously in the news because she was interviewed on Don Newman’s show.
There WILL be an election…although I agree with Bonnie that the GG should abide by the law and just say “no”. Consequently, there WILL be debates. If a separatist party that represents only one province can be in the debate, it is only ETHICAL that May’s voice is heard, as she represents 7% of Canadians in most, if not all provinces, and now has a sitting MP (if he were allowed to sit, but the PM has taken that option off the table).
Ethics, the environment and the economy are front and centre for this election. The economy platform should include addressing poverty, the health care system and a national daycare program (among other issues that affect voters economically).
The environment and the economy are interwoven, thanks to the Green Shift, and I agree with the Green Shift…especially knowing that there is a contingency fund for people like farmers, truckers, fishermen, etc.
Had it not been for Garth’s blog, I would not know (and perhaps not care) about many things that I now feel strongly about. Thanks to people like you, Barb, TS, Brain, James and others, I have learned a lot, and have been given food for thought on a daily basis.
This blog has vastly improved in the past few weeks, with only a few people going over the top or being annoying, btw, imho.
I do stand by my assertion that the big convention model actually facilitates the selection of the leader by the back-room boys (another image) while giving the illusion of grass-roots democracy.
By William Laidlaw on 09.03.08 6:45 am
I don’t necessarily agree with this opinion. I don’t believe that the selection of Dion as Liberal leader could be characterized as selection by backroom boys.
I have been involved in a couple of leadership conventions and the dynamics can be democratic. Although those who are voted in as delegates tend to be those who party members know can and will attend (the cost generally makes it difficult for some to attend although some riding organizations provide financial assistance through fund raising).
In my experience the party backroom people can be less able to maintain control in a convention setting than in some of the other systems of selecting a leader.
Given how inconsequential the Greens are certain members of the Liberal caucus seem to be downright fussy about folks voting for the Greens.
One wonders why.
CB I – I will admit to being very untrusting when it comes to politicians and processes – the potential rewards of being the winner, and being the controller/backer of the winner, of the leadership of a major political party in this country are so great that it is worth locking your scruples up in the closet and selling your soul.
I’d love to believe – but find it very hard to – which means that I quite understand where some of our posters come from who have thrown the baby out with the bathwater, at least in their own minds.
some of our posters come from who have thrown the baby out with the bathwater, at least in their own minds.
By William Laidlaw on 09.03.08 9:18 pm
It`s all a matter of perspective. The choice is to vote against corporate corruption or judicial corruption. What appears to be bath water to you is a bucket of sewer water that needs to be thrown out. For those of us that don`t have your perception perhaps you could point out the baby, then we won`t feel it`s “at least in their own minds”.
The shock jock from Quebec has more right to be at the debates than Elizabeth May. Arthur Cote is the sole independent elected to have a seat in the House of Commons.
Arthur undoubtedly would shake up the debates. L0L
I would be in favour of Elizabeth being at the debates if Arthur was included too.
With luck, in my Southern Ontario riding where a Conservative was elected in 2006, a Liberal will take his place.
When can I phone Liberal headquarters and have a Liberal sign installed on my lawn? I asked for one last year from the Liberal who was ultimate defeated, but no one arrived with it. So this time ‘around, whom should I phone early in the election to ensure I get one?
Dear Unintended, please don’t get your shorts in a knot – I am quite prepared for the possibility that time may well prove some of my conjectures and opinions to be wrong, and by the same token, some of them to be correct.
As I said, I can understand the reasoning of those who have come to the conclusion that our present political system is completely flawed and needs to be replaced – and I can also understand the reasoning of those who find it to be in good working order – and the various paths in between.
The one thing about all of this that I know with absolute surety is that do not know is which is the correct path.
Time in its unfolding of the future will show that, and my only hope is that we as a society have the wisdom to change when it becomes obvious that we have been backing the wrong horse so to speak. Hopefully that collective vision comes before the damage is irretrievable, but history shows that that is not always the case.
Let us continue to argue, without rancour, and hopefully with a little humour.
By Truth B Told on 09.03.08 1:04 am
By brain on 09.02.08 9:39 pm
I think that you are miss-informed on that one. Even the light gravity, sweet crudes from both Turner Valley and the Grand Prairie deep well fields need to be cleaned, fractionated, and desulfurized!
The process of cracking the medium and heavy distillates still occurs, too to raise the gasoline and solvent yeilds, plus the kerosene and light gas-oil fractions for the Jet Fuels and diesel blends may also be enhanced. those crudes have a much lower residual asphalt and bunker “C” content that they normally would probably just ship them out to a heavy oil upgrader facility or to the coast for ships. In the Eastern and central Prairies from the shallower wells there is far heavier gravity crudes, some of which have very low gasoline contents, and also pump more salt water plus sediment. This brine is locked into the crude and released in the “treaters” using very high voltage electrode potentials and steam heat to break the static-electric forces. This brine and sediment is called B.S. & W. that must be pumped back down hole to a strata that is compatible. [Conservation Authority prevents poisoning water well strata which can be as deep as 100 to 150' or more in some areas.]
Some fields have much higher sulfur contents and are not as profitable due to their “sour” rating and cost of cleaning the fractions. The solvent fraction [varsol] before desulfurization is about the color of apple juice or cider at Lloydminster, with a small adjacent fraction of “polymer” that is insoluable and looks like tobacco juice in the bottom of the gallon jug [purloined on 4-12 shift!] Yet 45 miles away at Wainwright the crude is not so black -more of a bluey green with out any polymer but some considerable paraffin wax content. There happens to be a paraffin refinery in Scarborough, Ont. just North of 401 East of Kennedy and South of Sheppard, hidden in back where you would not expect it. They quadruple distill to make every thing from food jar sealing to floor and car waxes. That all comes out of oil wells, not bee hives! – TBT
You could be right. I took the 100,000 BOE pd figure from looking at Canadian crude exports/imports, BOE pd refined and refinery used/spare capacity in Canada and there was about 100,000 BOE’s left over.
I always believed when I was younger that every single drop of crude that comes from the ground sees a refinery, but that was until I talked to a few well operators over the years who have told me of wells in existence with a crude quality that doesn’t need to be refined, along with a VP at BMO Investorline who told me of the existence of a 70,000 BOE pd oil field in Alta (or is that Sask? I heard it back in 2000, I hope my memory’s accurate with this one) that has an ultra light sweet crude quality that is void of water cuts and major impurities that produces crude that is of a high enough quality that can be blended off with refined liquids to create usable products. To me it makes sense that small percentages of raw crude can be mixed off with refined liquids to create a usable product but a geologist or someone at the refinery end of things would be a far better person to ask than myself in terms of the extent.
As for where the oilfield I was told about in question or the numbers on Canada’s told crude production that doesn’t see refining because it simply doesn’t need it or is of a high enough quality that it can be mixed or blended off without being refined first, I wouldn’t know where to begin to find a link that could provide the hard numbers. The 100,000 BOE pd is an estimate and I’m glad you’ve challenged me on it to point out that it is, in fact, an estimate.
“Now the rest of the story: I have read that only 2% of the World’s CO2} emissions come from Canada, and that only 40% of Canada’s portion is from the Fort Mac area refineries.” – TBT
I shouldn’t have to tell you to be careful what you read. I believe our Carbon footprint is slightly over 2.5% of the worlds C02 emissions. As well, Sask & Alta combines to produce 38% of Canada’s total emissions at present, according to one of Garths recent pieces about 2 or 3 months back (again, if my memory serves me correctly). Alta C02 emissions however, are expected to rise substantially as the tarsands continues to increase production so Alta could be producing 40% of Canada’s C02 emmissions within a decade depending on the rate of tarsands development. The tarsands is currently producing 1.1 mil BOE pd, but it is projected to be 1.7 mil B0E per day by 2016 and potentially double by 2020 so Alta could in fact, be producing 40% of Canada’s C02 a decade from now and continue to grow as the tarsands continues to develop.
“Yet I also read the over 50% of the world’s forests (trees) have been cut down and not repalnted since the start of the Industrial Age. TREES are the natural CO2} capture and sequestration mechanism. This is where I think the problem and the solution lies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation
About half of the mature tropical forests, between 750 to 800 million hectares of the original 1.5 to 1.6 billion hectares that once covered the planet have fallen.[5] The forest loss is already acute in Southeast Asia, the second of the world’s great biodiversity hot spots. Much of what remains is in the Amazon basin, where the Amazon Rainforest covered more than 600 million hectares. The forests are being destroyed at a pace tracking the rapid pace of human population growth. Unless significant measures are taken on a world-wide basis to preserve them, by 2030 there will only be ten percent remaining [2][5] with another ten percent in a degraded condition.[2] 80 percent will have been lost and with them the irreversible loss of hundreds of thousands of species.[2]” – TBT
Reforestation is a big, big part of the equation for sure. Excellent point.
“Now you tell me why I should get bent out of shape over our portion of the problem when it is in fact a World Wide problem that requires smarter men in government than we have now to negotiate and deliver scientifically sound plans to remediate the true problems INTERNATIONALLY!” – TBT
Ok, I will. Because you are right. It is in fact, a global problem and we are a part of the world and therefore, it is also a problem Canada shares and must work on. If we want to save face, we should try becoming part of the solution and like you say, we need the right people in the powers that be to make it happen.
We are a nation of 33 million people living in a world of 6.6 billion comprising of .4925% of the worlds population. We emit, on average, 5 times as much as the human average (2.5% of the worlds C02). We have on average a carbon footprint that is 30 times greater than anyone from a third world average.
To say that we can’t proportionally do our share to reduce our footprint because we are to poor or too technically disadvantaged or because its too unfair to Canadians is hardly a good argument to do nothing.
Why should you be bent out of shape? Because we don’t have the leaders we should have that possess the will or initiative to become a part of the global solution to climate change/C02 reductions and to get the leaders we need in the positions of power that will create the needed change, I suggest that we need to get “bent out of shape” to make that happen.
“When we have a bush league druggie generation in charge, I just shake my head and close my wallet! (I am from that rare generation born of war hysteria in 1940)” – TBT
I hear ya, lol.
Let us continue to argue, without rancour, and hopefully with a little humour.
By William Laidlaw on 09.04.08 3:10 am
I have np with that. We don`t have to worry about the collective vision, as I`ve said economic conditions will force the change. The economic numbers still confirm that and what a collective vision that will make, reality can be brutal.
the melt is on
By Canuck on 09.04.08 1:15 am
If you live in a riding like the one I live in, go onto a major artierial route, and take whatever sign you fancy. They are littered in multiples all over the street, I am sure the candidate won’t miss one.
I waited a few days to think about this post. Garth, I think it’s perfect to put May under the full scrutiny of the public and the media.
In truth 650,000 voters cast ballots for May in the last election. It brought to life 2 issues. One, is the environment and the second, was a place to simply park protest votes. But do we really know the Green Party apart from Ms. May?
In the recent couple of days we have seen the so-called “Ottawa Group of Four” Green candidates making very serious charges against Isreal. They say they are not anti-semitic but when they want Isreal to turn all of its lands over, how can one read anything but this? The Greens also had to let go of one of its BC candidates for his anti-semitic comments on a blog. And also their first MP (for the next 2 days) was a former Liberal which Dion had to let go due to alleged irregular campaign expense reporting…
And if the green vote evapourates, where does it go?