TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Canadians are in an abusive relationship...
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Canadians are in an abusive relationship...

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Colum.../27/944222.html

We've become a nation of enablers
By Lorrie Goldstein

The longer the federal Liberals stay in power, the more they resemble an abusive husband and father lording it over his family. With the family being the rest of us.

Consider the similarities, regardless of whether Jean Chretien, or now, Paul Martin, happens to be in charge:


# The first thing an abuser typically does in order to gain control of his wife and children is to take over the finances of the family and cut them off from any outside influences.

Think of the usurious taxation levels the Liberals have imposed on us, which discourage entrepreneurship, independence and private initiative.


# In order to reinforce his dominance over his family, the abuser will take away the money his wife or kids have earned and refuse to tell them what he plans to do with it.

Think of all those Liberal "foundations" which contain billions of our tax dollars, while we have no way of knowing how the money is being spent, or even if it's being spent.


# Abusers are arbitrary and heartless toward family members and will, to display their power, deny them even the most basic needs, such as money for the week's groceries.

Think about how our health care system is falling apart, with Canadians unable to obtain timely medical tests or surgeries, while the Liberals boast about achieving record surpluses with OUR money.


# An abuser, simply to lord it over his family and prove that he can do it, will steal cash from family members and if caught, refuse to admit it or even make jokes about it.

Think of AdScam.


# In order to secure his grip on power over his family, an abuser will often divide family members against one another by arbitrarily favouring one member over another.

Think of asymmetrical federalism. Think of special deals for some provinces and not for others -- such as Ontario -- to help pay for the costs of immigration. Think of arbitrarily changing the rules governing equalization payments without even consulting the provinces that will have to pay for it.


# As part of his strategy to dominate his family, an abuser will often charge other family members with incompetence, without ever admitting to any incompetence of his own.

Think of the federal gun registry.


# An abuser tolerates no questioning of his decisions from the rest of the family and will humiliate, insult and intimidate them if they dare to disagree with his iron-fisted rule.

Think of how the Liberals have portrayed Canadians who oppose same-sex marriage -- who make up anywhere from one-half to two-thirds of the population, depending on which poll you believe -- as bigots, simply for supporting a position that most of them supported just a few years ago.

Gratuitous insults


# In order to cover up his own blatant insecurities, an abuser will often gratuitously insult and put down others.

Think of the Liberals' attitude toward the United States.


Clearly, then, Canadian taxpayers are in an abusive relationship with the federal Liberals.

But if that says something about them, what does it say about us?

Typically, in abused families, those being abused eventually become so beaten down that they come to believe there is no alternative to their predicament. They often develop what is known as Stockholm syndrome, in which they come to identify with their abuser.

All of which helps to explain present national voting patterns in Canada which keep returning the Liberals to power, particularly among Ontario voters, who overwhelmingly vote Liberal no matter how much the Liberals abuse and ignore them once they are safely back in office.

All of which leads to the inevitable conclusion that if the Liberals are the abusers, then Canadian voters -- particularly those of us in Ontario -- are their enablers.

Clearly, we need help.

You can have Bush

I live in the U.S. now, and I still pay high taxes ( the Federal government passes many expenses to the state level, and many states are now in debt, California especially ). At least in Canada, much of your taxes go to health care, because in the U.S. many families lose their homes and life savings due to someone getting sick. Also in Maryland, the cost of health insurance coverage is going up at rates exceeding 10% yearly, even though payouts have not increased; while there is a crises of doctors leaving the state because of exhorbident Mal Practice Insurance ( Rates increasing even though payouts are not ). The reasons for this is that Insurance Companies contributed most to the election of our Republican Governor who will almost surely not get re elected. Also our family values governor wants to bring casino gambling to the state to solve the states financial crisis, and it is the democrats blocking his effort. Also Bush has run up the largest debt in U.S. history with his Iraq war, and may ruin the future of our military ( Marines and army no longer meet recruit goals and restarting the draft would be political suicide ). Also our debt may trigger financial panic and depression ( 1930s ) when other countries stop propping up our currency. Sooner or layer it will be time to pay, and unfortunately Bushes financial incompetance will affect Canada. Before you preach the virtues of conservatism you should realize that the only true values they heed is corporate greed, and wedge politics, and remember what a great leader ( and taxer ) Brian Mulrooney was.

i completely agree with the article except one thing. The gratuitous use of "he" and "his" which assumes that the abuser in a relationship is always male. I know for a fact that this is not true. There are many abusive women out there as well.

Sadly my cousin was stuck in a relationship with an abusive woman and instead of sympathy from people he usually got made fun of.

that's kind of a stupid comparison.

plus i may not like the liberal gov, but their really isn't a better party to vote for

NDP sure, but they will never win, plus they will cost our country a fortune

the conservitive. well if she's complaining about the liberals i really don't think she wants them in power.

anyhow that article could apply to any goverment currently in power, its always the same. and right now with a minority liberal gov. alot of the crap she says, like speaking of the "foundation money" im guessing she means sposoship scandal, doesn't apply since the liberal are put under such a big microscope by all other parties.

probably would of applied more before the elections

i dont think the conservatives would waste our money like the liberals have.

Its time to change the regime. This Liberal govt is stale and corrupt.

# As part of his strategy to dominate his family, an abuser will often charge other family members with incompetence, without ever admitting to any incompetence of his own.

Think of the federal gun registry.


this happens to any non-proffit organization, like a democratic goverment

give any project to a private company, and you'll find thing don't quite cost as much. ppl get fired easy and others get cut. and numbers get checked. and project that cost money, don't get started at all.

Regardless this clearly wasent done properly. But i have a really hard time beleiving that any other goverment we put in place would have done any better

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 i completely agree with the article except one thing. The gratuitous use of "he" and "his" which assumes that the abuser in a relationship is always male. I know for a fact that this is not true. There are many abusive women out there as well. Sadly my cousin was stuck in a relationship with an abusive woman and instead of sympathy from people he usually got made fun of.

Exactly. This is something I feel strongly about too. About how *often* its always viewed as a "male" thing only... and IF they tables are turned, then for some reason it is never taken seriously, which is bullshit.

This double standard is extraordinarily offensive IMO

We need democratic reform. Our system of government has not changed in almost 200 years, whereas the system it was loosely based upon (British constitutional monarchy/parliamentary democracy) has evolved in this time.

We need further checks and balances as far as accountability goes (� la British "permanent secretaries" - more power/independence for the civil service), more relevant (proportional - more MPs) representation in parliament, etc. etc.

The choices as they stand are not the issue, it's how they are being applied that is the crux of the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by amb_ We need democratic reform. Our system of government has not changed in almost 200 years, whereas the system it was loosely based upon (British constitutional monarchy/parliamentary democracy) has evolved in this time. We need further checks and balances as far as accountability goes (� la British "permanent secretaries" - more power/independence for the civil service), more relevant (proportional - more MPs) representation in parliament, etc. etc. The choices as they stand are not the issue, it's how they are being applied that is the crux of the issue.

The Lieberals would never agree to democratic reform, because it would reduce their stranglehold on the country.

Jean Chretien often mused that Canada's political system was far superior to the American system. The reason: "I can get more things done." Well yes, in a dictatorship, the dictator can get more things done.


Even in the UK which has no written constitution, they speak of "separation of powers."

We need a new government, a new constitution, or both.

Lets start with dumping the Liberals, then maybe we can worry about real reform.

The Liberals will never change anything as long as they are in power because it works well for them.

Instead they will worry about non-issues like gay marriage and gun registries while real issues like health care and debt retirement and lowering the tax burden on us citizens is laregly ignored.

And yes i said gay marriage is a non-issue. Especially when patients are waiting for days in hallways to get treatment in our nation's hospitals.

on a completely different note, did you guys watch the editorial on Sunday on CBC called "Minority report" it's all about how the media was manipulated during the election and such. Check it out it's pretty good, and fairly neutral in bias.

the best part was how the media whined when Harper pretty much ignored them. They were trying to say that if you dont kiss the media's ass they will make you look bad. This is exactly why i dont let the media decide my politics for me.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 the best part was how the media whined when Harper pretty much ignored them. They were trying to say that if you dont kiss the media's ass they will make you look bad. This is exactly why i dont let the media decide my politics for me.

I thought it was interesting how the media butchered Harper/Torys on the Child porn statement and the video by Ron White (Tory - Justice Critic).

I was actually a bit shocked by the statements White made, I had never heard them. I consider myself fairly centered when it comes to polics depending issue to issue, but the statements he was making was a bit apalling.

Liberal Gov't = Comunism with a choice.

TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT IN OUR LIVES...

There were quite a few quips that were controversial from Liberal backbenchers too. The difference was solely the amount of media coverage on both parties. There is no doubt that Canadian media was biased on the side of the Liberals. When the Liberals made gaffes it was on the 18th page but when it was a Conservative it was front page headlines.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 There were quite a few quips that were controversial from Liberal backbenchers too. The difference was solely the amount of media coverage on both parties. There is no doubt that Canadian media was biased on the side of the Liberals. When the Liberals made gaffes it was on the 18th page but when it was a Conservative it was front page headlines.

I think so too, but remember fear mongering gets headlines. Ultra conservative views are generally not well liked by Canada.

I actually miss the Prog Conservatives

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 The Liberals will never change anything as long as they are in power because it works well for them.

In reality, it's working horribly for them, and it has since Chr�tien lost his position as "friendly dictator" when the Martin camp emerged, before the election. Liberal cohesiveness has been shattered and there's really no hope in sight for them, given the current organisational climate. Sorry, "Mr. Dithers".

quote:

Originally posted by ShadoWolf The Lieberals would never agree to democratic reform...

Unfortunately real democratic reform (changes to representation, constitution, distribution of executive powers) can only happen when all parties represented in government can agree to the changes. This is not a question with who holds control in parliament but is a question of a leader who can instill non-partisan co-operation across the board. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I honestly don't think there's any political figure in the current landscape that offers that sort of possibility. If I'm wrong in this assertion, I would love to hear why...

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe I thought it was interesting how the media butchered Harper/Torys on the Child porn statement and the video by Ron White (Tory - Justice Critic). I was actually a bit shocked by the statements White made, I had never heard them. I consider myself fairly centered when it comes to polics depending issue to issue, but the statements he was making was a bit apalling.

You mean Randy White?

Here's what he said: from the LIEBERAL PARTY website no less:

http://www.liberal.ca/news_e.aspx?type=news&news=837

quote:

Conservative Party Wants to Redefine Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Limit Judiciary�s Role June 25, 2004 An Alliance-Conservative government would redefine the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and use the Notwithstanding Clause to overturn any judicial decision it did not agree with, such as abortion, says one of the Conservative Party�s most prominent members. �If the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is going to be used as the crutch to carry forward all of the issues that social libertarians want, then there�s got to be for us conservatives out there a way to put checks and balances in there,� BC Alliance-Conservative MP Randy White said in an interview May 19th, 2004, four days before the federal election was called. �I think you�ll see more uses for the Notwithstanding Clause in the future,� he said. �I think you�ll even see that redefined as the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Responsibilities, which is really needed for an amendment.� Alliance-Conservative leader Stephen Harper made the same point in an interview in today�s Vancouver Province, �I think the reality with the Charter is that we can always look at a constitutional amendment.� White, who made his comments in an interview for Alexis Mackintosh�s documentary film �Let No One Put Asunder,� is currently Stephen Harper�s special advisor on health and the drug review agency. He was also the founding Justice critic of the Reform Party, a former House leader for the Alliance Party, and was elected the party�s caucus chair in June 2001. During the interview, White said an Alliance-Conservative government would exercise the judicial override �not just [for] the definition of marriage, but I think, you�ll see more uses for the Notwithstanding Clause in the future.� In this context, White, a self-professed pro-life advocate, said a woman�s right to choose was a cause championed by activist judges seeking to �make a name� for themselves. �That�s one rotten, hellish way to run a country�s moral and social society,� he said. �I think people have to start drawing lines on these judges out there�I�m sick of all that.� He also launched a withering attack on Canada�s judiciary and made clear the judiciary�s role would be limited under an Alliance-Conservative government. �Well, the heck with the courts, eh,� White said. �We in this country are going to stand up and say, �The politicians make the laws and the courts do not.� The courts interpret the law. And, if we don�t like the interpretation, there�s the Notwithstanding Clause in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.� �I think most people are getting sick and tired of judges writing the law to suit themselves and to suit the current Liberal Government,� he added. White said an Alliance-Conservative government would not hesitate to use the Notwithstanding Clause to overrule any judicial decision it did not support. �I believe we�ll see that with us in the House of Commons, because enough is enough of this stuff. We are not going to be legislated by judges in the country, nor should we be,� he said. White, a strong supporter of Harper�s leadership bid, said in a press release earlier this year that �the issues I have fought to implement in Canadian society�are all supported by Stephen Harper. He will make changes that benefit us all.� White also vigorously defended Harper�s recent decision not to apologize for a press release suggesting Prime Minister Martin supported child pornography: �There�s nothing to apologize for� he told the Abbotsford Times on June 22, 2004. To watch the full interview with Randy White, please use the following link: mms://66.46.213.202/archives/randy_white_interview.wmv

EVERYTHING HE SAID IS ABSOLUTLY TRUE!!!

Remember, the PM appoints the Supreme Court justices without any check on his power. He also appoints many provincial court judges, again, without any check on his power to do so.

The Charter is un-Canadian, and is the worst legacy of the worst PM in history.

It's about time that Canadians wake up and stand up for democracy in this country.

quote:

Alliance-Conservative leader Stephen Harper

Funny, but I dont recall any party called the "alliance-conservatives" ever running for election in Canada.

Could this be the biased media that i was talking about earlier?

first off if the alliance conservative NAZIS ever get voted into power. ill move out of this country.

The Government has no place in the bedroom, or telling me what is moraly and socialy accpetable. its the governmetns roll to put in place legeslation to assure the health, safety and wellbeing of its people, not to dictate every detail about their private lives.

since when does gay marriages affect heterosexual couples?
since when does a women's right to choose affect anyone else?


i agree that the charter of rights and freedoms needs ammending and alot of work, its a bandaid legeslation designed to force people to be un prejudiced, but it causes prejudice agains the non minority.

if it was up to harper and his alliance - conservative party, all our non white christian citizens would be thrown in box cars and sent off to camps, and only blond haired blue eyed white hetero couples would be allowed to live in this country.

Lorrie Goldstein can take her biased nazi conservative viewpoints and shove them right up her ass....


WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO DICTATE HOW PEOPLE MAKE DECISIONS THAT AFFECT THEIR LIVES.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 i dont think the conservatives would waste our money like the liberals have. Its time to change the regime. This Liberal govt is stale and corrupt.

Ya that 5 billion dollar defecit the ontario tories accumulated in ontario was a brilliant example of conservative fiscal management.

Whatever the convervatives when they changed the riens provided a defiect to the next party close to what the NDP gave the tories when they took power. Moreover the NDP amounted thier defecit through spending in time of recession where as the tories created a defecit through cutting back in a economic boom.

Figure that one out?

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp first off if the alliance conservative NAZIS ever get voted into power. ill move out of this country. The Government has no place in the bedroom, or telling me what is moraly and socialy accpetable. its the governmetns roll to put in place legeslation to assure the health, safety and wellbeing of its people, not to dictate every detail about their private lives. since when does gay marriages affect heterosexual couples? since when does a women's right to choose affect anyone else? i agree that the charter of rights and freedoms needs ammending and alot of work, its a bandaid legeslation designed to force people to be un prejudiced, but it causes prejudice agains the non minority. if it was up to harper and his alliance - conservative party, all our non white christian citizens would be thrown in box cars and sent off to camps, and only blond haired blue eyed white hetero couples would be allowed to live in this country. Lorrie Goldstein can take her biased nazi conservative viewpoints and shove them right up her ass.... WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO DICTATE HOW PEOPLE MAKE DECISIONS THAT AFFECT THEIR LIVES.

Wow. I think that post is a contender for the 2005 Moronic Post of the Year.

Classic stupidity.

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp first off if the alliance conservative NAZIS ever get voted into power. ill move out of this country.

Ciao!

quote:

The Government has no place in the bedroom, or telling me what is moraly and socialy accpetable. its the governmetns roll to put in place legeslation to assure the health, safety and wellbeing of its people, not to dictate every detail about their private lives.

Agreed which is why the conservatives don't want to prevent homosexual unions, they just want to make sure there is comprimise by not actually calling it marriage. Please dont confuse that by saying they are homophobic or whatever because its simply not the case.

quote:

since when does gay marriages affect heterosexual couples?

It doesnt. But religious groups are rightly concerned that they may have to perform marriages if its called marriage.

quote:

since when does a women's right to choose affect anyone else?

Ive never heard anything about the Conservatives wanting to ban abortion.

quote:

i agree that the charter of rights and freedoms needs ammending and alot of work, its a bandaid legeslation designed to force people to be un prejudiced, but it causes prejudice agains the non minority.

So prejudice against the majority is OK but not the other way around? GIVE YOUR HEAD A SHAKE!!

quote:

if it was up to harper and his alliance - conservative party, all our non white christian citizens would be thrown in box cars and sent off to camps, and only blond haired blue eyed white hetero couples would be allowed to live in this country.

Right... thats quite the racist statement you just made yourself and im not even going to validate it with more response than this.

quote:

Lorrie Goldstein can take her biased nazi conservative viewpoints and shove them right up her ass....

"she" is a he. Oh yes BTW Hes a Jew... there goes your theory about nazis and non-white christian canadians!

Before you speak, educate yourself dude.

quote:

WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO DICTATE HOW PEOPLE MAKE DECISIONS THAT AFFECT THEIR LIVES.

Yet from that post it sounds like thats exactly what you want to do.

quote:

Originally posted by ShadoWolf Wow. I think that post is a contender for the 2005 Moronic Post of the Year. Classic stupidity.

This coming from the uncontested moronic post champion of 2002-2004.

swilly

first of all, mariages dont have to be performed in a church setting, they can be done by a justice of the peace... and they are still technically married. i dont htink any gay couple would want to get married in an environment where they dont feel welcome. i dont think thats a valid argument.

the new alliance - conservative party has never sat well with me since i get the impression that they want to mix religion and politics... which never works. that and i just dont trust them. they are tories afterall....

im not saying that it is oficial party platform to suport the banning of abortion, but i do remember alot of alliance members talking about htis subject matter during the last election.

the charter isnt perfect but i think parliment is the last body that should have veto power over supreme court rulings. if htey are going to bother with that then why the hell do we have a supreme court anyways.

as for the prejudice agianst the non minoritys look at the other thread in in TOTA forum.... i think its called "this is disgusting" which basically goes into workplace diversity programs and how its causeing employers to hire people not based on merit but on ethnic and cultural background.

as for the alliance - conservative party and how i think they would run the country? first and formost, we would probably be signed up for weaponization of space in seconds, dragged into a huge defecit by playing lapdog to the US, and hurt relations with french speaking canada.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.