Mitch Cronin Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 Harper received commitments from all 18 appointees that should the process change such that Senators are elected, all 18 will resign and allow their seats to be contested. Mulroney never debated Trudeau on television. Regarding your first point... That's what Greg said... Good thing. Re your second point: I thought he did, but now looking through google confirms I was thinking of the televised debate between Turner and Mulroney. Still the same point... there's Mulroney acting so high and mighty chastising the Liberals for patronage, as though he'd be better than that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DAS Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 Mike Puffy is moving back to a cottage on PEI he owns with his brother, so no problem with the Senate residency requirements...and more upside for Mike, he only has to buy one airline seat on his Ottawa commute. The airlines can only charge for one seat on 'large' passengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest woxof Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 Having had the election, it is only now that parliament has truly become dysfunctional, so much so that it isn't even sitting. ....nearly every advanced democracy provides financial support to its political parties. Think of Khazakstan and you'll have the comparison about right. .... stop playing to the myth that the Libs, NDP or Bloc are acting any differently in opposition than the Reform, PC or Conservatives did during their time in the same position. Geez, if only we hadn't had that election, there would have been no coalition. Sweden doesn't provide subsidies to political parties. I'll compare to them, Thank you. Please stop pretending that this government is any more underhanded than previous ones. Once again, all these references to trust and how bad Harper is while conveniently ignoring similar hipocrisy from opposition parties. Harper can't be trusted but all the others can eh? Face the facts that none can be trusted and all are conniving to stay or get in power. Get past that and then look at policies to decide what you feel what is best for the country. "This is a new low for Canada, and Harper’s Tories aren’t to blame" by Andrew Coyne http://blog.macleans.ca/2008/12/11/a-polit...eir-own-making/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoomerPete Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 Geez, if only we hadn't had that election, there would have been no coalition. Possibly not. But then again with this funding stunt the opposition parties would probably have had to grow the necessary set of balls regardless. Sweden doesn't provide subsidies to political parties. I'll compare to them, Thank you. I see. You'll be supporting our adoption of the remainder of their taxation system as well then, I imagine? I guess instead of digging $2.50 out of your pocket to support the party you voted for you'd rather hand over 50%+ of everything you make in order to see that all your countrymen have enough income and security to make federal funding for political parties unneccesary. Who knew you were really a socialist at heart? Please stop pretending that this government is any more underhanded than previous ones. Once again, all these references to trust and how bad Harper is while conveniently ignoring similar hipocrisy from opposition parties. Harper can't be trusted but all the others can eh? I've never once taken to promoting any political party. But, the fact remains that Harper has proven to be untrustworthy on a very fundamental level. Aside from the numerous changes in rules of governance that he promised but has then failed to implement (threads/posts here about all of those), this latest stunt is over the top. Every politician lies to the extent that they promise more than they're likely to achieve, but none that I know of has ever gone to the house immediately after an election and tried to enact a policy intended to strip its opponents of their means of financial support without the slightest debate. That's never happened before. In fact, the basis of the current system which favours the Conservatives was the result of a commission the Liberals convened and legislation that they proposed from the commission's recommendations. Huge difference in method of creating policy wouldn't you say? Look as well at the intention to remove the right to strike from civil servants. Where did that come from? It certainly wasn't a part of the party's platform during the election that had just occurred. And, of exactly what use it at the time when the contracts in place with most civil service unions are considered to be working well? Do you think there's a federal civil servant out there who's likely to trust Harper again after his unilateral attempt to annex the key element of their collective bargaining rights? And how about this small matter of deliberately deceiving the public about what is and is not democratic or constitutional? The man lied in the most fundamental way when he started saying that what the opposition proposed was undemocratic. It was completely democratic and totally within the rules that govern how parliament works. Yet a good portion of the populace has been lead to believe that the opposition parties are undemocratically trying to steal their votes and sieze power as if by coup. Nothing like the big lie is there? The problem is that in uttering it you undermine the whole system of constitutional democracy which leaves the nation less certain of what the rules really are and how they will be observed. It's the first big step to becoming a banana republic. And then there's prorogation. What other PM in our history has ever used this device as an attempt to avoid a vote of confidence? None. The only other time parliament was prorogued it was not to avoid a vote but because the PM (Mackenzie King) at the time wanted parliament to be disolved and an election called. Never before have we seen a PM willing to shut down parliament in the middle of session simply to avoid a vote that might lead to the defeat of his government. It's an absolutely historic abuse of the system which leads one to wonder what other abuses would be possible if Harper was given the powers of a majority. Coincidentally, the prorogation came about because the GG followed the precedents of constitutional law and refused to grant King another election so soon after the last one before attempting to see if any other party was able to form a government with the confidence of the house. The Liberals, who had been governing with fewer elected MP's than the Conservatives (sound familiar?), lost the privilege of forming a government without an election being called when a number of Progressive MP's shiifted their support from the Liberals to the Conservatives. It will be interesting to watch what Harper will say should the same turn of events comes to pass now. He's made it clear that he would consider such an accession undemocratic. How will he attempt to sell that lie when the proof that it's not is in every 5th grader's history textbook? Face the facts that none can be trusted and all are conniving to stay or get in power. Get past that and then look at policies to decide what you feel what is best for the country. So, you do accept that the Conservatives have lied and will lie just as any other party in order to maintain power? Finally. We can agree on that. But before looking past the party to the policies there's the small matter of the leader. And, with the Conservatives we have an example of a party that is completely in the control of its leader. The principle by which it has governed is that all policy and decisions emanate from the PMO. Mr. Flaherty's fiscal fumble has clearly shown how little influence ministers or, God forbid, the departmental bureaucrats have in actually determining policy, so the most important question becomes: Is this man fit and suitable to hold the powers he wishes to exercise. The answer is: No. History is replete with examples of leaders whose hubris was so great that they led their countries, and at times the world, to ruin. We need only look to the south to find a man with a mode of governing similar to Harper's who in 8 years so thoroughly destroyed the finances, prestige and governing processes of his country that it will probably take them decades to recover. Who in their right mind would want a similar leader in power here? Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fido Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 I have just added Boomer Pete to the list of 'posters who write too long a post' and therefore not worth reading. There are already a couple from AEF on the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rattler Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 Mike Puffy is moving back to a cottage on PEI he owns with his brother, so no problem with the Senate residency requirements...and more upside for Mike, he only has to buy one airline seat on his Ottawa commute. The airlines can only charge for one seat on 'large' passengers. You seem more concerned about the man's girth than his ability to ability to serve in his new role, how come? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
handyman Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 I have just added Boomer Pete to the list of 'posters who write too long a post' and therefore not worth reading. There are already a couple from AEF on the list. Agreed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest woxof Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 I admit that long posts are many times ignored. They just go on and on. But I did scan through most of it. Just wanted to point out the inaccuracies in my short posts. Such as deflating the theory that somehow Harper is making us like Kazakhstan by attempting to cut off public funding for political parties when Sweden does the same. The response.....I must be some sort of socialist. Harper prorogued parliament. Apparently it is constitutional as it was done. Just like the coalition is constitutional despite whet Harper may say. Then a long list of continuation about Harper's lying, deception of the public and untrustworthiness and how bad it is. Therefore, I assume the only solution is replacement by the party(or the biggest of the three) that has promised in election campaigning to get rid of the GST and free trade. Woxof......Straightening out the twists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoomerPete Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 I have just added Boomer Pete to the list of 'posters who write too long a post' and therefore not worth reading. There are already a couple from AEF on the list. Why, instead of addressing the issues, do you choose to denigrate the person you disagree with? So, it's long. Big deal, no one's forcing you to read it. If you have nothing better to offer in response it hardly matters to me whether you read what I write. Merry Christmas to you too. Pete Hopefully stated shortly and sweetly enough to suit your attention span. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canus Chinookus Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 I have just added Boomer Pete to the list of 'posters who write too long a post' and therefore not worth reading. There are already a couple from AEF on the list. and here I thought I was the only one!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted December 25, 2008 Author Share Posted December 25, 2008 I hate to crap on some of you on Christmas but I think the comments from the some of you concerning BP's posting are juvenile/petty and certainly don't enhance your personal status on this board. Whether you agree or disagree with the length of any authors post is a very personal opinion and one that should be kept to oneself. To publically ridicule an individual for taking the time to respond in clear and concise language, whether it is a long or short post, is not relevant to any discussion. You three should be embarassed with YOUR posting concerning this very subject and I would venture to say that if you are all very grateful to be hiding behind a non de plume ...how embarassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
handyman Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 Ok, I'm officially embarrassed! It's Christmas and time for a truce. Merry Christmas all. Handyman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canus Chinookus Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 Hey easy! I was posting in fun, didn't mean the severity, other than making the point my eyes glaze over when the posts get so long. Cheers, Merry Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 Why, instead of addressing the issues, do you choose to denigrate the person you disagree with? So, it's long. Big deal, no one's forcing you to read it. If you have nothing better to offer in response it hardly matters to me whether you read what I write. Merry Christmas to you too. Pete Hopefully stated shortly and sweetly enough to suit your attention span. Zinnngggg! Congrats on the new contract Pete! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoomerPete Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 Zinnngggg! Congrats on the new contract Pete! Moon, Thanks for the best wishes. I'm happy to be home regularly even if there's white stuff everywhere right now. Landed in YVR a couple hours agao ... can you believe that all 4 ILS Glidepath's were u/s? Merry Christmas, Moon! Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoomerPete Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 It's Christmas and time for a truce. Merry Christmas all. Handyman. Truce accepted. Merry Christmas to all. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mo32a Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 can you believe that all 4 ILS Glidepath's were u/s? Pete Yeah I can - the snow piled up in front of the antennae causes deflections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoomerPete Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 Yeah I can - the snow piled up in front of the antennae causes deflections. Figured it was something like that ... just never seen it happen that badly before. Hopefully things are getting back to normal this afternoon. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 26, 2008 Share Posted December 26, 2008 I have just added Boomer Pete to the list of 'posters who write too long a post' and therefore not worth reading. There are already a couple from AEF on the list. Substance! For Pete sakes [ ]... Boomer's one who makes this place really worth visiting. I know..., I know... The rest of you settled down to a Christmas truce....[and Merry Christmas to y'all], but you fido.... I think you owe Boomer an apology. You wouldn't be that rude in person, would you? What's different here? It was rude. ...and would be rude on any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted December 26, 2008 Share Posted December 26, 2008 Boomer's one who makes this place really worth visiting. Pete's one guy I'm constantly learning from - consumate professional aviator and great contributor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDR Posted December 26, 2008 Share Posted December 26, 2008 Pete's one guy I'm constantly learning from - consumate professional aviator and great contributor. Well said Don Happy Boxing Day Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 26, 2008 Share Posted December 26, 2008 chickens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted December 26, 2008 Share Posted December 26, 2008 chickens I have no doubt I'm on Fido's list of windy posters as well. I'll read every word Pete's got to share and I think one misses something by not having the patience to absorb long thoughts on matters - today's "sound bite" world is already far too polar-opposite, and human solutions to human problems can't be expressed in sentence or two. If we're here for tea only, then have at 'er and don't forget to wash yer cup. For others, drink deep - the time and effort are worth it. I for one, won't (can't) modify my terrible habits. Happy Boxing Day to you too Greg. No time for reading - too much snow to photograph! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted December 27, 2008 Share Posted December 27, 2008 I for one, won't (can't) modify my terrible habits. Good. See? Life does have some cherries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoomerPete Posted December 27, 2008 Share Posted December 27, 2008 Gents, I'm humbled. Thanks for your kind words. Best wishes to you all for 2009. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.