|
TOTA Election (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MarkT |
right...and no other party that's been in power has ever engaged in similar behaviour (and that no future one will either).
I think people need to get off their high moral horse and stop pretending that this is an isolated case...and that it means that the current administration, particularly Martin, is unfit to lead.
Don't miscontrue that as condoning that behaviour...
What I'd ask of people is this...what could Martin be doing differently? There's an inquiry and he's asked people to wait for the results. |
|
|
| crazedcanuck |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
what's truly laughable is that people like you feel that the sponsorship scandal means that the current Liberal administration is unfit to lead. There is no CAUSAL relationship there, however the Liberal detractors want to spin it. |
I listed a brief synopsis of their failures FAR beyond the debacle that is the sponsorship scandal. You can add billions in penalty payments for cancelled military contracts in the 90's for helicopters and naval support, only to order near-identical equipment from liberal-friendly companies less than 2yrs later. There's a lot more I could parade out if I felt like it.
So please tell me how my opinon, based in well documented fact, is laughable again? And where did I insinuate a casual relationship between scandal and leaership capabilities? It's quite a serious correlation that has been made quite public that they are lining their pockets with public money... in the BILLIONS. All under the watch of the finance minister of the time.. who is now our Prime Minister.
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
anyone can put together a platform...if you CAN'T implement it, it's just hot air meant to sway voters. |
Like being a MINORITY government?
Oh, and "free votes" are votes by members of parliment without being chained down by towing the party line. Meaning your MP votes in accordance to his constituents wishes, which may or may not be the same as the party platform. Imagine that, an MP actually representing the people who voted them in.
And you still haven't given any evidence to support any current or potential Liberal leaders as requested.
As for Harper, your quite right, he doesn't have it to lead IMO either. That is no reason to give the stamp of approval to the current regime
Aside from Layton, we seem to be stuck in a quality transition for politcal figures of quality @ the moment. |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
This likely is attributable to the middle class want for tax relief more then anything else. This is understandable although short sighted (as I explain earlier in this thread). That being said I don't fault the middle class for this.... I could use a tax break, I don't want one (yet) but I could use one! |
I agree...who doesn't want a tax break...but I DO fault people for voting on that basis...voting solely for your own benefit is selfish.
Ideally, and maybe I'm speaking from a somewhat privelidged position, one should vote for what will benefit our country in general, not just what benefits them (especially on an issue so stupid as small tax breaks). |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
right...and no other party that's been in power has ever engaged in similar behaviour (and that no future one will either).
I think people need to get off their high moral horse and stop pretending that this is an isolated case...and that it means that the current administration, particularly Martin, is unfit to lead.
Don't miscontrue that as condoning that behaviour...
What I'd ask of people is this...what could Martin be doing differently? There's an inquiry and he's asked people to wait for the results. |
He could be resigning and desolving the party to ensure that this never happens again. Dont tell me martin didnt know what was going on.
He has two options:
1) he knew about this and was part of the scandal
2) as finance minister he had no idea and a quarter of a billion dollars went missing on his watch
Either way the buck stops with who is in charge and remember that the finance minister at the time was Martin. Either way he's not fit to govern.
Voting Liberal condones and rewards criminal activity. There is no way around it.
A scandal to such degree has never happened before. And if we re-elect them we will be telling them that there are no consequences. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
I agree...who doesn't want a tax break...but I DO fault people for voting on that basis...voting solely for your own benefit is selfish.
|
As selfish as stealing public funds to finance your campaign? |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
He could be resigning and desolving the party to ensure that this never happens again. Dont tell me martin didnt know what was going on.
... |
and stupid remarks like that are exactly why I've grown tired of attempting to logically debate people on this issue.
So the police force, by it's own members remarks and findings, use racial profiling when performing their duties. Discrimination of that nature is illegal last time I checked the provisions of our Charter.
So I guess the police cheif could resign and dissolve the police force by firing every member, and then we can just start a new one...you know, to ensure that racial profiling never happens again?
don't be ridiculous. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
I agree...who doesn't want a tax break...but I DO fault people for voting on that basis...voting solely for your own benefit is selfish.
Ideally, and maybe I'm speaking from a somewhat privelidged position, one should vote for what will benefit our country in general, not just what benefits them (especially on an issue so stupid as small tax breaks). |
That is not a privelidged position but rather an enlightened one.
What is best for the country is why I would prefer not to have a tax cut currently. Anyone who wants a tax cut fails to see the big picture... that being that if we continue to tax as we are and pay down the debt as we are we will pay off the debt completly (I am not sure what the predicted time period for this is as I really have not had time to keep up with such things for the past year). Once the debt is paid off that will free up approximatly 30% of our tax revenues that are currently used to service the debt. Once this is done then we could increase social spending and give a significant tax cut (we're talking 10% reductions). |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
As selfish as stealing public funds to finance your campaign? |
way to tie two unrelated issues together.
if we expect our politicians to not be selfish, shouldn't we at least hold ourselves to a similar standard? |
|
|
| crazedcanuck |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
right...and no other party that's been in power has ever engaged in similar behaviour (and that no future one will either).
I think people need to get off their high moral horse and stop pretending that this is an isolated case...and that it means that the current administration, particularly Martin, is unfit to lead.
Don't miscontrue that as condoning that behaviour...
What I'd ask of people is this...what could Martin be doing differently? There's an inquiry and he's asked people to wait for the results. |
Next to no-one is treating the current scandal as an isolated case. If anything it's the public perception of this being par for the course in politics that's generating enough voter-apathy to keep the Liberals from being completely crushed by it.
And how is it being pious to be disgusted by such an abuse of power and public funds and trust? The current administration is the one that presided over it DIRECTLY. There is nothing Martin can do to change the situation aside from stepping down, or sacrificing the inner power circle in the Liberal party that presided over this with him all these years. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Of course they want tax relief. Services have gone down and taxes have gone up and there is a huge surplus. I think the middle of the road taxpayer is sick of waste. |
taxes have gone down over the past 5 years. Were you not paying attention? |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
a vast majority of constitutional lawyers say that Harper is not able to legally have same-sex unions as a solution to gay marriage, yet he refuses to back down. |
That's not at all what they said. They said that in order to maintain the traditional definition of marriage without granting rights to fays in light of the provincial court cases that Parliament would require use of the notwithstanding clause (which can easily be achieved). However, that's not the Conservative policy. Harper wants to grant FULL RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES TO GAYS in a civil union AND maintain the tradition definition. By granting gays those rights, that meets the pith and substance of the provincial court rulings vis-a-vis the charter, and the notwithstanding clause is not required.
| quote: | | Will of the people, party line, whatever...it does NOT matter. If he's unable to implement it, yet sticks to his position in the face of EXPERTS saying he can't do it, that's one indication enough to me that he's unfit to lead. |
They're not experts, they're partisan hacks, looking for an appointment down the road. Consider their political donations to the Lieberals and NDP. |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
right...and no other party that's been in power has ever engaged in similar behaviour (and that no future one will either).
|
NO!
That's exactly the point - this behaviour is unprecedented in Canadian history!
edit: Let's not forget that AdScam is the tip of the iceberg. Remember Shawinigate, the gun registry fiasco ($1 billion), the HRDC boondoggle (another $2 billion), the unaudited $9 billion hidden in secret foundations, etc. etc.
Oh, and perhaps the biggest boondoggle ever, announced just today:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/nati...yoto050415.html
$10 billion (part of which is good money spent, the rest is waste).
The Lieberals told us that the gun registry would cost $2 million, and it ended up costing $1 billion.
They said Kyoto would cost $10 billion, but they will end up spending $5,000,000,000,000! |
|
|
|
|
