Tuesday, December 02, 2008

Your thoughts on Canada?



With what is happening in Ottawa right now places us in a unique position as Canadians in this moement of history. I know that our spiritual community is made up of all types of political leanings and I tend to stay away from mixing the Bible and the Pulpit...but now, I would like to hear your opinions. (Tastfully)
Thoughts?

34 comments:

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hfGy_b87gI&feature=related

too true

Kyle said...

My opinion is that the people of Canada voted for the Conservative's to govern. Stephane Dion believes he "has earned the right" to become PM. Last time I checked, Canada was still a democracy. Dion's Liberals had the worst performance in history yet he still believes that he should become PM. If Canadians wanted him to be PM, we would've voted that way.

I say it's time to head back to the poll's to form a Harper majority and show Dion how Canada really feels about his leadership.

Most people say it's a bad time to spend $300,000,000 on another election, but I guarantee it's a lot cheaper than having a coalition that is going to spend BILLIONS of taxpayer money on concessions to the Bloc, "greenshift", higher taxes, etc. How is Canada going to regain investor confidence worldwide with a separatist regime holding the balance of power??? How's that going to be for our economic situation?

I do not want another election, however, I believe it's the only way out of this situation without whoring Canada out to the Bloc, AND best for Canada!

Mark said...

Kyle, you suggest (along with LOTS of others on facebook) that the possibility of a BlocLiberalNDP coalition government somehow threatens democracy. I have no idea why this is so. Maybe there are a lot of reasons to be upset about this change, but that does not imply that our democracy is at stake.

I'm not sure what sort of principle is being employed here. Is it something like:

Any coalition government is undemocratic?

or,

Any coalition government that doesn't include the party with the most seats is undemocratic?

I think that both of those are pretty obviously false. If someone has something better to say, then I'd like to hear it.

Kyle said...

The fact is this...Canada did not vote for Liberal, NDP, or Bloc! The fact that a Gov't can be overtaken by a coalition is flaw in our Parliamentary system. It just isn't right. But it's our system!

My issue isn't just the democratic process being challenged. In fact, that's just a minor issue. My issue is that Stephane Dion was given a clear message that he isn't fit to lead his own party let alone the country! My issue is that pushing a socialist (NDP) economic platform will sink our economy even further into chaos. My issue is that there will need to be concessions made to a Separatist regime that shouldn't even be counted as a federal party in the first place. My issue is that a coalition challenges our strength and stability as a country given the fact that the Bloc will hold the balance of power. My issue is that we are going to see reckless spending, higher taxes, and corruption to keep the coalition functioning. Shall I go on???

I say head back to the polls to see what the Canadian people think of a coalition. At the end of the day, we (the voters) pay their salaries! I also think it's time for the Conservatives to start talking electoral reform again!!! BRING EM ON!

Scott said...

I'm disgusted with the people who 7 weeks ago promised they had Canada's best intentions at heart. BS. I followed this election closely, and Dion and Layton promised to defend democracy.

7 weeks on, they have thrown democracy under the bus in favor for their own agendas. Dion is a weak person, his leadership skills are questioned by his own party, and he isn't back by many in his own party. Layton is a fool, socialist at heart, his views for Canada would bring us into a much deeper recession. 30 Billion to the auto industry would cripple our economy. The markets dropped to record lows yesterday after the signing of the coalition, is this not a sign to these idiots?

The parliament we voted for as Canadians was Conservative, now Dion and Layton want to null and void our votes, throw democracy and the freedom we have to vote out the window, and form a government very few want.

Personally i am outraged, i wouldn't mind knocking Jack Layton out myself. It's disgraceful to Canada, their parties, and the people that support them to act in such a way that doesn't put the people they are supposed to speak for first.

A pathetic day for the NDP and the Liberals.

(I keep the Bloc out of here, because they don't care either way, and they will do whatever ti takes to separate)

Scott said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scott said...

Mark,

"Democracy is a form of government in which power is held by people under a free electoral system."

FREE ELECTORAL. Canada voted for Conservatives, not a Coalition, what is hard to understand about this?

Here's just three of the rules that democracy follows.

Respect the people.
Respect the process.
Respect the Outcome.

In what ways are Dion and Layton following the rules of Democracy?

Also about threatening Democracy...How is taking away my vote NOT threatening to the future of democracy in Canada. What is being said here is that my vote didn't count because now someone else could take power without having an election process. Do you understand what a democratic society in Canada entails?

Karen said...

Scott you said
"Layton is a fool, socialist at heart...."

Is Layton a fool because he believes in socialism? I do not have a lot of understanding about government or even the definitions we give to various terms used in the political arena but I always have pictured Jesus to be a socialist at heart to some extent. (that is if I understand the term correctly) Even the early church seemed to share all they had with each other. It was not about a few with much but about everyone receiving what was needed.
I am not saying I want the NDP in leadership but I was just interested in why in your opinion Layton is a fool.

Scott said...

While Jesus may have been a socialist, i also would think that Jesus would heavily promote Democracy, considering the freedom it allows for all people under this form of rule. Jesus, i do also believe, would have accepted any laws, he did have to live under roman law, which was partly democratic in nature.

Democracy promotes equality, but it also rewards the people who put in the extra effort, and why not, why not reward someone who takes the time to move forward the economy? Who gets and education to be a doctor? Who fights on the front lines for our freedom?. Socialism promotes equality, and sharing, these are good things, but Socialism is never in it's true. form, and is almost impossible to attain, much like Pure Communism. It also rewards people who could care less about the country and wouldn't lift a finger to help at any moment.

Furthermore, Jack Layton's socialist views are widely criticized as inefficient and incompatible with the way of life in Canada. He is fool because, while holding many socialist beliefs, he thinks handing out 30 Billion dollars to People in his home province is good for the economy. Sharing the wealth with only one southern part of one Provence is hardly an a alignment to NDP standards.

I'll leave you with this. Taliban Jack is a well known nickname for Jack Layton, yes, not only did this guy not support the efforts of our men and women in Afghanistan, he also pledged sympathy for the Taliban. Yes the very same people who raped, killed, tortured, and massacred etc, women, children and a whole country. Good on you Jack, i guess equality extends to the scum of this earth.

I think the word fool is fully justified.

Anonymous said...

Mark.... where are you?! You're quite quiet!!!

Kyle said...

There are a lot of valid points in all of these posts. The fact remains that what is going on is part of our democratic system in Canada. It is a flaw! But what the coalition needs to realize is that when it comes time for a vote, they are finished! The 3 Stooges may be able to hold it together for a short while, but an election is never too far away!

I highly encourage EVERYONE to understand the facts, and what is at stake. Get involved and stand up for your beliefs. After all, the Gov't works for us! We did not hire the coalition! We certainly did not hire Stephane Dion as our PM. We hired Stephen Harper and the Conservatives in a fair, democratic election.

Anonymous said...

In the last election:

Conservatives - 143 seats

Liberals - 76 seats
NDP - 37 seats
(together make 113 seats)

Since the Bloc is not officially a part of the Coalition, how do the Liberals & NDP believe they have the majority in the house?

Scott said...

Anon, the Bloc is apart of the Coalition, after signing the accord on monday This gives them a "majority".

Kyle said...

So the SEPARATISTS hold the balance of power and can overthrow the coalition at any time!!! Makes sense to have a government that is held hostage by a separatist regime in order to pass ANY legislation. Can you say INSTABILITY?????

WOW!!! What a sad situation!!

Jean said...

ugh. On all accounts.
First of all: ugh that Conservatives started out by playing this "card" saying they were going to cut all funding that the parties would get from each vote. I see the strategy, but it was dirty. S.H. thought he could cripple the opposition, but now it's coming back to bite him.

second ugh: ugh that Stefane Dion, who just a month ago was defeated because of his lame-o Green shift plan and his weak leadership causing the least amount of Liberal seats in decades, is now getting a second chance to be Prime Minister? Really? I don't get it. The liberals were just about to hold a leadership convention to figure out a better leader.
(that's really gotta hurt those waiting in the wings!)

The 3 parties are doing what's in their best interests, but I'm not sure they'll be able to work together. Dion said during the election that Layton's strategy would be devastating to the economy; now they want to work together to save the economy?

Can someone tell me why they can kill this minority government when there hasn't been an issue to vote on yet? This wasn't an official budget?

Jordan said...

Kyle, I'm in absoulte agreement with your last post. The idea of the balance of power being held by those of a anti-fedralist movement. I can probably speak for the majority of western Canada when saying I'm not to fond of Gilles Duceppe and his backround. Seeing as he held membership in the Workers Communist Party of Canada.

Like really, why have those with no intrest outside there province aid in governing a nation?

Scott said...

It's not about interest Jordan, its about getting what he wants for Quebec by making deals with the Grits and the Commies. It's about pushing forward to seperating from Canada, and with some Power, he would be able to push his agenda forward. The grits dont care because they would have the PM. The NDP don't care because 1. They are NDP, and 2. they have Taliban Jack as their leader, he just wants some form of power, doesn't care if he decimates the country to get it.

Detty said...

I normally just read but thought I would clarify a couple of comments that I read which are not correct.

As posted by Anon, the Bloc is not an official part of the Coalition. The Liberals and NDP are the only ones that signed the agreement (accord) to form a coalition government. Here is the link to the official accord (Bloc's name is not on it):

http://www.cbc.ca/news/pdf/081201_Accord_en.pdf

The only reference to the Bloc in the accord is the comment that upon the formation of the government, they will put in place a consultation mechanism with the Bloc.

The only documents that the Bloc signed were a written pledge of support for 18 months for the new government, and the letter requesting that the governor general call on the Leader of the Official Opposition to form a new government.

A letter from Jack Layton (NDP) even indicates that the NDP and Liberals have resolved to form a new government and have support of the Bloc.

http://www.liberal.ca/pdf/docs/081201_GG_Layton_en.pdf

The only saving grace for the Liberals & NDP is that the Bloc has agreed to not go against them in any major parliamentary votes for 18 months.

Scott said...

UPDATE: The GG has agreed to Prorogue the house till January 26th, the day the Budget will be announced.

A solid move by Harper and the Torries, this allows them to take the time, without distraction, to come up with a efficient and smart budget for Canada. It's also a good move because it gives a chance for things to calm down, let people enjoy their Christmas.

A confidence motion will be done regardless once the Budget is made available, as it is with any money bills.

From what a saw last night, it doesn't look like the Liberals are prepared for anything anyways. CBC aired, what looked like a home video recording of Dion talking to the people of Canada about the Coalition. Not only was it late to air, it also looked like they put it together during the time we all waited for it to come out. Those Grits....

Scott said...

Yes Detty,

I was going to clarify that. The Bloc isn't "official" But the 18 month agreement basically makes them apart of the Coalition. They would still pledge their seats to form a Majority in the house, to dethrone Harper. While its not said like the NDP & Liberal participation, they will have equal say, but they only want one thing, as well all should know by now.

Mark said...

Wow, you leave things alone for 2 days and people get all silly.

Kyle said that my point was small, it is; I'm making no claims otherwise. The only point that I was trying to make is that I think all these claims about the coalition being undemocratic are silly.

If this coalition is undemocratic, then it follows that all coalition governments are undemocratic. Since it seems absurd to claim that all coalition governments are undemocratic, it follows that this coalition is not undemocratic.

The coalition being democratic doesn't entail that people should be happy about it or that there aren't things seriously wrong with it (I wasn't giving any arguments about the costs or benefits of a coalition government).

I think that there is good reason to keep inflammatory language out of politics (see Scott's first two posts for examples of inflammatory language) and I think that claims about the undemocraticness of the coalition are just that, inflammatory.

In place of this language, I think it would be much better if we worked hard to give good reasons for or against the current political situation. If someone presents reasons in favour of it, respond to their reasons and don't change the topic.

Scott said...

Ok Mark, tell me what countries have a democratic coalition that is working? Would love to see that. Maybe the inflammatory language is a bi-product of my anger towards the silliness of these 2 parties that think this is what Canada wants, even though its completely and utterly obvious that it isn't. Checked the polls lately? Read the news?

I'm pretty sure I have said why a Coalition is bad. So i will put it out in point form.

1. 3 Leaders, 3 different views, 3 different wants for Budget, 3 Different political parties

2. Separatist in a position of Power

3. Economy is in turmoil, lets throw 30 Billion dollars that we don't have at a auto industry not worth saving.

4. The would-be PM isn't wanted as leader of his own party.

5. NDP leader doesn't support the military operation in Afghanistan.

6. Who wants another Scandal-crazy Party in Power. What is Gomery's phone number?

The reasons go on an on, these are just a few.

Canada voted for a Conservative government, let them Govern.

Mark said...

Scott,

You say: "tell me what countries have a democratic coalition that is working?" I don't know how this has anything to do with whether a coalition government is democratic or not. The only point I was making was that calling the coalition undemocratic is false.

I'm not about to get into a debate about the merits of the coalition government. I've not been following it closely the last little while since I don't live in the country anymore.

Also, note that I didn't say you didn't give any reasons. I just singled out your first couple posts (and not the latter ones) since they were prime examples of the inflammatory rhetoric that I was talking about.

Giving arguments is about giving reasons and I'd much rather be involved in blog threads where people give reasons. I'm glad that you started doing that in some of your later posts.

(For future reference, I don't need a point form breakdown. I'm more than capable of extracting reasons from prose.)

Scott said...

Mark,

Dually noted, the first couple of posts were pure frustration with the opposition parties. Reason went out the window. I have since calmed down, and I will try in the future to be more concise the first time.

To me, this past election really gripped me. Most will say it was a boring and pointless election, but this one got me going for some reason. To have what I voted for threatened by backroom politics is quite the frustrating ordeal. It is in no way what i and many other Conservative voters voted for on Oct. 14th.

When i say it is undemocratic, i mean the way that the Coalition has gone about disregarding democratic reforms like voters rights. Democracy in Canada has given the power to the people to put a government in power. On Oct 14th we put a Conservative presence on Parliament Hill. I want democracy to be upheld in the manner of which it is used in Canada.

I do apologize for getting a little irrational however.

Kyle said...

Let us Conservatives consider this.....

If the shoe was on the other foot, and the Conservative's led a coalition to overthrow the Liberals that were just voted in 7 weeks ago, what would be our honest reaction? Would we be in support of such coalition? Or would we side with the governing Liberals?

I've asked myself this question and found myself siding with the Conservative led coalition in such scenario. Is it right? No! But the reality is that in a democracy, there is always going to be a segment of the population that feels left out. Everyone has the right to their own opinions, political leanings, religion, etc. Let's just come together and agree that we do live in the best country in the world!

Scott said...

I agree Kyle, but i just don't want too on the other hand. Hypothetical questions are always hard to answer, plainly, it's because there isn't an answer. I don't think we can live in the what ifs. Thing is, when the conservatives were the opposition, i didn't have a problem with it, with the whole sponsorship scandal, and the many others, it was enjoyable watching a party implode.

If the Grits and the NDP were sure Harper would screw everything up, i think they would do what Harper did, sit back and let it all play out. I do think though, that the liberals and the NDP are worried about the good things Harper will do for the country.

A question that i just thought of....

Do you think that politicians have the best interest of Canada in hand?

Most politicians prey on others mistakes. For the most part, these mistakes cost this country jobs and money. But it must be true that the opposition would want major screw ups to happen just so they could get the chance to be voted in and do it all over again.

Sometimes it would seem politics is just one massive swindle. No one ever wins, no one ever loses. It just goes in circles.

Kyle said...

Great points Scott! I don't like playing the "What if" game either, but sometimes we have to give ourselves a little reality check. That if all things being equal, would we react differently?

Let's face it, people generally are self centered. Politicians are no different. Every single one of those politicians want to be in the spotlight. We've proven that brains don't mean anything in politics. Just look at Dion. It's all about backroom deals, playing the system, and poking at everyone else's failures.

Having said that, I don't think they have intentions on screwing up the country either. I just think that every decision made is self serving to their own agenda's. Politicians, like the rest of us just want to secure their own future.

Gregg said...

Countires with effective coalition governments:

Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Turkey, Israel, New Zealand, Pakistan and India, Switzerland (since 1959) and Finland who has never had a majority gov.

Gregg said...

Also Australia, the United Kingdom has had a coalition every time there was a minority government. Umm Canada has already been federally and many of times provincially.

This is simply how democracy works in a minority gov.

Mark said...

Gregg,

I think a little more should be said about what you mean by "effective". India and Pakistan do have coalition governments, but I think it's a stretch to say that either is effective. The Pakistani government has been more or less impotent the last couple years and the Indian government is so overrun with in-fighting that it's not exactly been effective.

Some serious questions could also be raised about the Italian government.

Despite these, you're right that there are a number of countries who both do have coalition governments and haven't self-destructed.

Scott said...

"Umm Canada has already been federally "

Once, in 1917, for the duration of the War. Then it tanked, HARD.

I think you are mistaking Coalition governments, with governments that reach across the isle. There isn't 3 parties running the UK, or many of those are countries you listed. I'm talking about effective Coalitions that have been in power in countries that have prospered under them.

Also, I like people saying that Harper isn't reaching across the isle. Have we seen the bloody Budget yet? You can't believe that the conservative government is talking to the other parties. Well maybe you can, but that is ignorant.

Socialist Gregg said...

Mark your right, for me to slump Pakistan and India into the term effective is a stretch but their ineffectiveness is also more due to the countries situations and people.

Scott.
No I don't think I've mistaken anything. All those countries have coalition gov. in either times of need or minorities. To say coalitions are unstable and undemocratic is an ignorant statement simply because you are angry at the current situation in Canada. Coalitions don't need 3 parties to be called a coalition. It only takes two to tango! 2 and 3 are more common. Finland which has had it's most stable government since independence named the "rainbow government" consists of 5 different parties. Germany which has returned from a state of fascism to become one of the top European countries united under a coalition government with the CDU, SPD and the greens.

Canada's coalition for WWI didn't tank after the war it was disbanded because it was no longer needed. Coalitions exists during times of trouble because minorities accomplish nothing.

But then what would I know on anything as Kyle said I am obviously a socialist and therefore you should forgive my ignorance on these things. We all know socialism is the enemy of the free world. We need to stick to our Fascist orientated Capitalism.

Scott said...

It's ignorant to think that everything you say is ignorant just because one person told you that you were just that.

When it comes to Finland, and other countries, you simply can't compare the two. Finland has its own Governmental system, which, if im not mistaken, is a presidential parliamentary system. Canada's political landscape is much different.

"Canada's coalition for WWI didn't tank after the war it was disbanded because it was no longer needed. Coalitions exists during times of trouble because minorities accomplish nothing."

It was not supported at all after tough times. So what would happen to a Coalition now? If history tells us anything, the same thing would happen. Also the Harper Minority has accomplished much, it's very naive to look past accomplishments that have benefited all Canadians, no matter what party they support.

Finally, Coalitions in non-democratic countries are fine, they don't impede on Democracy, but in a country such as Canada, with STRONG democratic traditions, it is undemocratic.

I don't think your ignorant Gregg, I just think the way you are going about arguing this issue is ignorant. I know you have some good points, but they are overshadowed by all the arrogance involved in the points. You know as well as i do that i have had my arse handed to me using this method of debating.

Anonymous said...

wow, after all that I'm glad they put it to rest for a bit