Steve Zissou
Rookie
Don't point that gun at him, he's an unpaid intern.
Posts: 47 
|
Post by Steve Zissou on Sept 10, 2008 19:54:08 GMT -5
Don't know yet, but I'm leaning on two different options than the last time around.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Sept 10, 2008 21:03:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Sept 11, 2008 7:21:24 GMT -5
Shocked me as well...
Having said that, it probably shouldn't have. It's unfortunate, perhaps a bi-product of our 15 second sound-byte world, but people label themselves and others with certain political denominations; "I'm a conservative... I'm a liberal... Republican... Democrat..." The result of course is that independent thought is lost. When people are forced to think for themselves, like in this poll when we don't know who is saying what, we end up finding out that our political thoughts are generally all over the map. If we know who said what, we change our opinion on the actual quote, simply because of who said it. When doing that quiz I recognized a few of those quotes, and had to stop myself from automically picking/rejecting them simply because I knew who had said them.
While the ultimate result had me picking Elizabeth May (??) my actual responses were pretty evenly divided amongst all parties.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Sept 11, 2008 7:25:30 GMT -5
* new accoutability legislation - kept I don't think so .... bringing elected parties/officials to court, blotching out requested information when requested by media, not letting officials speak to the media, refusing to speak to the media etc etc etc Harper's government has been the least open and least accountable we have had .... |
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Sept 11, 2008 8:06:13 GMT -5
I wound up picking Harper. No surprise there since my politics have always leaned towards the Conservative. He still won't be getting my vote though, because frankly I don't trust him to live up to what he says. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Sept 11, 2008 11:38:37 GMT -5
Color me unshocked with my results |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Sept 11, 2008 12:06:19 GMT -5
I ended up picking NDP, but when I went back through the results it's because I had 3 NDP picks, compared to 2 for both Conservative and Liberal (nothing on the Green party's platform appeals to me except putting money into water conservation research, which wasn't a question).
I already knew I was a moderate. The thing should tell you that, instead of implying to someone they're a tried-and-true NDP supporter.
|
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Sept 11, 2008 14:16:43 GMT -5
Hmmm...let's see....
...vote for morons, liars or twits....
....think I'll go with the morons again!
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Sept 11, 2008 15:25:06 GMT -5
Hmmm...let's see.... ...vote for morons, liars or twits.... ....think I'll go with the morons again! Sorry, boss . . . help me out here . . . I can't seem to find my program. Which one is which? They all could fit into every category! |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Sept 11, 2008 18:04:55 GMT -5
Hmmm...let's see.... ...vote for morons, liars or twits.... ....think I'll go with the morons again! Sorry, boss . . . help me out here . . . I can't seem to find my program. Which one is which? They all could fit into every category! PROGRAMS! PROGRAMS!! GET YOUR PROGRAMS HERE!!! CAN'T TELL A KNIGHT FROM A DAY WITHOUT YOUR PROGRAMS!!! And some are predicting a majority. henky!!! |
|
|
|
Post by duster on Sept 11, 2008 20:29:04 GMT -5
An utterly uninspiring lot no matter what the choice. Perhaps there is something to be said about having a benevolent despot as opposed to an elected demagogue. Anyone know a good dictator who likes hockey??
|
|
|
|
Post by Yossarian on Sept 11, 2008 20:41:16 GMT -5
I haven't really had time to think about things, still winding down from a busy summer.
However, since Harper did state that Parliament with a minority government in the end was dysfunctional, it probably means it was working pretty well, with appropriate checks and balances, rather than a 4-5 year dictatorship. I don't mind his idea of dysfunction, so I hope for more of the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Sept 11, 2008 20:58:31 GMT -5
I wound up picking Harper. No surprise there since my politics have always leaned towards the Conservative. He still won't be getting my vote though, because frankly I don't trust him to live up to what he says. Mine came out with Harper too ... which is no surprise. But on 3 or 4 of the questions I agreed with no ones statement (eg climate change, since I don't believe in climate change) but I had to choose one. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Sept 11, 2008 21:05:56 GMT -5
* more support for Canadian Forces - kept This one depends on where you live ... sure he has a rosey attitude towards our soldiers abroad and he has instilled a little pride in our troops..... .... but, he has also promised to breath new life into 5-wing Goose Bay, (in NL) and now he is saying he wont. Goose Bay was suppose to get some Canadian troops to train there, and a JTF2 force there. No dice now. ... and Harper promised that new Coast Guard and Navy ships would be built in Canada. Well there are only two shipyards in Canada that can handle the work. One is in Vancouver, which is busy and cannot accommodate the work. The other is in Marystown, NL .... they were all but shoe-ins for the contracts, but then MacKay (on a trip overseas) is overheard (by a NL MHA) saying that the government is looking at getting the work down outside Canada. When questioned on it they deny the allegation and cancel the ship work.....  Harper's campaign song should be Eric Clapton's " Promises Made, Promises Broken" |
|
|
|
Post by duster on Sept 12, 2008 13:14:58 GMT -5
Not to pile on, but I agree with you Skilly. When it comes to the Armed Forces, Harper's government is big on announcements but very few contracts actually get signed.
The contract for the urgently required Chinook helicopters hasn't been signed yet despite being announced several times over the years (instead ,we have to buy 6 used machines from U.S. Army surplus while waiting for the Government to give the go-ahead on new ones), ditto new trucks (the current ones are over 25 years old). Ditto the much announced frigate update. I suppose everyone is likely still arguing over the pork.
I wouldn't hold my breath regarding the Arctic patrol vessels. I'm guessing they'll likely meet the fate of the erstwhile JSS and Coast Guard vessels. A shame since there are numerous successful designs already in existence. They could be built and put into service quickly.
The new Search and Rescue planes, deemed an urgent requirement three years ago, have been quietly shelved (The current ones are 40 years old or more). Ditto the Arctic Utility plane to replace the 40 year old Twin Otters. The CP-140 upgrade was reduced to 10 airplanes with yet to be acquired UAVs supposed to make up the slack. No sign of the latter.
Most of the current signed contracts - including the new Hercules, LAV and UAVs - were already agreed to by Treasury Board and Cabinet under the previous Liberal Goverment. The equipment bought for Afghanistan was paid for under the Liberals as an urgent operational requirement. The Leopards were funded using the money allocated for the cancelled MGS.
The C-17 was a Conservative pet project and, therefore, approved and acquired in record time. Shows that when there is a will, there is a way.
If anything, the budget allocated to defense has gone down in real terms. In fact, it will shrink even further under a Conversative government. If you do the math, the numbers simply don't back up the Conservative promises. Perhaps Mr Harper thinks the average Canadian can't count.
The Arctic training centre in Resolute Bay and the naval station at Nanisivik remain empty promises. Ditto the Arctic National Sensor System. Ditto the increase in number of Rangers. Absolutely zilch has happened since the much promised Canada First strategy - a document big on promises, but very light on specifics. Seems to be a current Harper modus operandi on most things.
Don't get me started on his economic policies...
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Sept 12, 2008 20:13:44 GMT -5
I wouldn't hold my breath regarding the Arctic patrol vessels. I'm guessing they'll likely meet the fate of the erstwhile JSS and Coast Guard vessels. A shame since there are numerous successful designs already in existence. They could be built and put into service quickly. I've been waiting for those Arctic patrol vessels, Duster. When I first heard of the initiative I was extremely impressed. When I heard that it was reduced to the one lone vessel, I was very disappointed. I'm guessing he must have had some sort of back-door agreement with Bush or something but who knows. I remember pointing this out when we first went into Afghanistan. The Liberals listened to Rick Hillier and they were getting as much as the government could afford; ADATS, G-Wagons, et al. The Liberals were forking out the money but it wasn't so well publicized. However, I think it was the Tories who brought in the Leopard II's. I hope the budget doesn't go down, Duster, but if it does I'm hoping its a reflection of decreased operations and not just budgeting. You're right, and I'm not defending the Tories, but these initiatives weren't even on the Liberal agenda for as long as they were in power. Chretien's policy was, "... why should we do that when we have the USA to provide it for us ..." That was his way of doing business. That said, I saw the pole results today and it had the Tories at 41% and the Liberals at 29%. I now see why Harper called this election now (another broken promise) as each of the opposition parties are leaderless. Having said that, I still wouldn't trust Harper with a majority. I think he'd abuse that leadership. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Sept 12, 2008 20:27:01 GMT -5
I wound up picking Harper. No surprise there since my politics have always leaned towards the Conservative. He still won't be getting my vote though, because frankly I don't trust him to live up to what he says. Mine came out with Harper too ... which is no surprise. But on 3 or 4 of the questions I agreed with no ones statement (eg climate change, since I don't believe in climate change) but I had to choose one. Harper too. |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Sept 12, 2008 20:59:28 GMT -5
Not to pile on, but I agree with you Skilly. When it comes to the Armed Forces, Harper's government is big on announcements but very few contracts actually get signed. Seems to be a worrisome trend in politics..... reporters are getting lazy and have lost credibility, and find themselves simply quoting whatever press release is put out there.... and we have more and more politicians who'll say what needs to be said but won't bother actually taking the actions to back up their so-called policy.... (I don't think this is limited to any specific issue, any particular country or party.... it's essentially a worldwide issue...) |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Oct 14, 2008 22:32:19 GMT -5
How long before Harper calls another election to get his majority? I'm not a card-carrying member of any party, but if the Libs were smart, they'd hold a leadership convention ASAP. Harper succeeded in labelling Dion as a wimp whose carbon tax would raise the price of "everything". That was the Conservative campaign....and I found it very insulting....but it worked. It also was an insult for the Libs to use the fear-mongering Harper-Bush image. Candidates for next Lib leader....keeping in mind "image"? Ignatieff (failed once)....Rae (bad memory for the Ontarians)....or maybe it's time for Justin Trudeau. He's perhaps too young yet... (he'll be 37 on Christmas Day)... but he's got charisma out the ying-yang, intelligent, well-spoken, political pedigree....and I saw him standing behind Dion on many occasions during the campaign trail. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Oct 14, 2008 22:40:51 GMT -5
The Liberals never really got it out there that the carbon tax was offset by other tax breaks. Their loss now.
140-some seats for the Tories, 13 seats more. Jack Layton's the guy who made real inroads this year, more than doubling the NDP presence in the house of commons.
For what it's worth, the Liberal party is meeting in March to discuss party affairs. Undoubtedly party leader will be among the topics. I'd still like to see Ignatieff run, but I guess I prefer intellectual-type candidates.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Oct 14, 2008 22:45:34 GMT -5
The Liberals never really got it out there that the carbon tax was offset by other tax breaks. Their loss now. 140-some seats for the Tories, 13 seats more. Jack Layton's the guy who made real inroads this year, more than doubling the NDP presence in the house of commons. For what it's worth, the Liberal party is meeting in March to discuss party affairs. Undoubtedly party leader will be among the topics. I'd still like to see Ignatieff run, but I guess I prefer intellectual-type candidates. No doubt Ignatieff has what it takes. Brilliant speaker from what I've heard. But if the Tories can run a campaign on image, Trudeau will throw it right back at them. I'd hate to see Canadian politics reduced to simply that....but hasn't image been a part of NA politics since JFK? Doesn't explain Nixon, though...does it?  In terms of Layton's increase....another example of Dion's failure...splitting the vote. Perhaps the stench of Ad-scam is still lingering as well. I feel bad for Elizabeth May....lost her riding to Peter MacKay. There's the first line of a song..... |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Oct 14, 2008 23:36:35 GMT -5
I just hope these 13 or so seats make a big enough difference to be worthwhile the tens of millions of dollars it cost us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Oct 15, 2008 0:01:27 GMT -5
Today is a good day.....not great...but a good day.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Oct 15, 2008 0:04:45 GMT -5
I just hope these 13 or so seats make a big enough difference to be worthwhile the tens of millions of dollars it cost us. That's peanuts in the greater scheme of things. A bank failure will cost hundreds of billions to the government (us!) to bail them out and support the rest of them. We have the BEST banking system in the West and the thing is still a house of cards. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Oct 15, 2008 0:23:44 GMT -5
Having said that, I still wouldn't trust Harper with a majority. I think he'd abuse that leadership. Cheers. Based on a feeling.......or facts? The vastly LEFT media call him a control freak because he does not wants people in his party to feed them sound bites. Because of that, he is a "control freak" Notice the word "freak". Has ANYBODY in the media owned up to their constant manipulation and distortions? Last week Harper had an interview and a hundred things were said but the ONLY thing you heard was how "it's a good time to buy stock". That automatically made him callous, untrustworthy and not caring for the little guy. IN FACT, he was right.....and Monday was proof of that. Harpers biggest problem is that he appears cold and calculating. While I consider that a GREAT trait for someone running a multinational or a country, it's not a good trait for a politician. People want to be protected and reassured...and Haper is not the cuddly guy to do that. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Oct 15, 2008 0:26:41 GMT -5
I just hope these 13 or so seats make a big enough difference to be worthwhile the tens of millions of dollars it cost us. That's peanuts in the greater scheme of things. A bank failure will cost hundreds of billions to the government (us!) to bail them out and support the rest of them. We have the BEST banking system in the West and the thing is still a house of cards. Yep. It would. Except that none of the Canadian banks are at any risk at the moment of failing. You know what else would cost us hundreds of billions of dollars? A mission to the moon. But it isn't happening either, is it? Do you have any basis on which to predict that the Canadian banks will fail? Or is it based on a feeling?  I think tens of millions of dollars is peanuts in the greater scheme of things, except that it was spent haphazardly (actually, it was probably planned long ago by the Tories) and unnecessarily. Polling indicated a longshot for a majority, so I personally didn't see the need to throw away those peanuts for the sake of 15 seats. Throwing money away isn't good regardless of how much it is. This isn't a good day. Perhaps for you it is, but not for Canada. A good day will be when we have a government which is willing to work across party lines to get legislation done which serves the interests of all of Canada. Harper's alienated the Bloq, the Liberals won't deal with him (nor will the couple Green candidates that could squeak in), so that gives Jack Layton the reigns of Canada through which most legislation will have to pass. Yup. Good day indeed. We'll be right back at the polls in two years, or less. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Oct 15, 2008 0:41:14 GMT -5
That's peanuts in the greater scheme of things. A bank failure will cost hundreds of billions to the government (us!) to bail them out and support the rest of them. We have the BEST banking system in the West and the thing is still a house of cards. Yep. It would. Except that none of the Canadian banks are at any risk at the moment of failing. You know what else would cost us hundreds of billions of dollars? A mission to the moon. But it isn't happening either, is it? Do you have any basis on which to predict that the Canadian banks will fail? Or is it based on a feeling? . I don't have "feelings" when it comes to money. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Oct 15, 2008 3:31:29 GMT -5
Let's not forget about the "Alberta Agenda" co-authored by Mr. Harper in 2000, while a member of the Canadian Alliance Party (formerly Reform...future Conservative). Here's the Alberta Agenda homepage. And here's co-author Conservative MLA Ted Morton speaking after Harper was elected PM in 2006. The Alberta Agenda is alive and well.....seeking autonomy from Ottawa...but still within the confederation....managing and keeping more of what they produce $-wise. They really don't want to share the wealth. Sounds good. But..... What about the NL Agenda? The BC Agenda? The Quebec Agenda? etc. They're all missing something. Tar sands. Who's Ted Morton? Only the Conservative Minister of Sustainable Resource Development of Alberta. Even though their website speaks of forestry, hunting, and fishing, with no mention of oil.... there are clips of him addressing oil companies about land usage...(watched it earlier today....can't find it) and they work hand-in-hand with their Ministry of Energy (Alberta Energy). I don't know guys....doesn't it smell an awful lot like Harper's main thrust is Alberta and their oil interests? Kyoto Protocol? Carbon tax? Both prohibitive to tar sand development, I'd say. During the campaign, Duceppe and Layton kept harping that the Conservatives have huge tax cuts planned for oil companies. Let's see what happens. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Oct 15, 2008 9:04:14 GMT -5
During the campaign, Duceppe and Layton kept harping that the Conservatives have huge tax cuts planned for oil companies. Let's see what happens. ...well I tend to think that this has a better chance to eventually translate into savings for the consumers and better economic sense than a carbon tax or blindly applying a protocol that no industrial country actually follow would. In the end though, Harper is made out to be the bad guy who doesn't want to save our endangered planet and gives money to the evil oil people. I'm not a sold conservative, but in the dire times ahead I want a pragmatic leader. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Oct 15, 2008 9:14:13 GMT -5
During the campaign, Duceppe and Layton kept harping that the Conservatives have huge tax cuts planned for oil companies. Let's see what happens. ...well I tend to think that this has a better chance to eventually translate into savings for the consumers and better economic sense than a carbon tax or blindly applying a protocol that no industrial country actually follow would. In the end though, Harper is made out to be the bad guy who doesn't want to save our endangered planet and gives money to the evil oil people. I'm not a sold conservative, but in the dire times ahead I want a pragmatic leader. Could very well be....I'm open to that scenario. Just throwin' things out there..... |
|
