Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Dave_ON

Members
  • Content Count

    880
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Dave_ON

  • Rank
    Full Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    London, Ontario
  1. Not entirely true, while your point about what I presume to be Trudeau's introduction of multiculturalism is indeed valid. The Sentiment of "not American" by far and in large predates that by quite a bit. Actually this notion would truly have started with the erstwhile right, the then Tory party of which Sir John A MacDonald was a prominent member. The very notion of the Colonies banding together in the face of manifest destiny and American Imperialism is the reason Canada even exists today. The threat of American invasion was a rather unsavory notion to the loyal British colonies. The Bri
  2. Ok so in summation it seems this view is heavily weighted toward economic and wealth distribution if I take your meaning. So then my next question would be must one reject all these items you've listed in order to not be considered a leftist? Is there no middle ground? Can one not support some of these items but not all? Is it truly fair to brand someone a "leftist" simply because they may support one of the items you've listed above? Many would posit that your concerns over economic restrictions held by the left are offset by social liberties, which as a general rule the right often rejec
  3. Woah is it 2005 again? In answer yes, as I recall it seems to me only the Liberals had a whipped vote on that little bit of legislation. Way to hit up current events. While we're addressing these items at the height of their relevance... did you hear about that utterly scandalous King-Byng affair?
  4. Then so be it, if that's the case they govern by happenstance and it was purely fools luck that got us through. Let us hope that fools luck holds true for the remainder of their term... I'm now going to invoke the often used line by those who are avid supporters of Mr. Harper and the CPC. "They didn't have a choice, the opposition forced them to do it".
  5. Point of order here. Your analogy falls apart somewhat. Emperor Nero was largely insane and was directly responsible for Rome burning. He wanted Rome to burn as this was necessary so that he could rebuild it as he saw fit. The CPC by contrast did not cause the economic crisis. They didn't actually start to address it either until it came down to a choice between sticking to their principles or power. Choosing power they realized that meant they had to actually compromise with the other parties. Hence we're in our current situation today for better or for worse.
  6. At the time Mr. Harper made his statements that there was no impending economic crisis, only someone in Grade school would have believed him. The US stock market took a massive crash, the US and Canadian economies are so closely linked, it was inevitable that a hit in the US was going to have rather a large ripple effect in Canada. We saw this most of all in Ontario, the manufacturing sector is still embattled and beleaguered to this very day. Other commodity and resource based economies like those of Alberta, SK and to a lesser extent BC fared quite a bit better. Long story short Bill,
  7. I have two sincere questions for you. I've only read a few of your posts and I don't feel I can adequately gauge what your perception of Left vs. Right is. These are terms that I'm a loathe to use as they are all too often used as trump cards to refute arguments that may be contrary to one's own views. "Well that's just part of the neo con agenga" or "That's leftist drivel". Neither of these statements engage nor do they even address the points in each particular point of view. So what in your view is the Left vs. the Right? Is it purely distribution of wealth? Are there social aspect
  8. Technically you're wrong. Dominion is a more archaic term for country. Specifically a large area of land that is self ruled. Here's the dictionary definition of dominion take special note of numbers four and five. 1. the power or right of governing and controlling; sovereign authority. 2. rule; control; domination. 3. a territory, usually of considerable size, in which a single rulership holds sway. 4. lands or domains subject to sovereignty or control. 5. Government . a territory constituting a self-governing commonwealth and being one of a number of such territories united in
  9. The simple answer: No, he doesn't have that kind of power. The constitution and the crown protects us from dictatorship as it were. The long answer: Is Mr. Harper autocratic? Well most certainly of that there is no doubt, is he more autocratic than Chretien, Mulroney, or Trudeau? Not at all, he's just taken the next step in an ongoing process. Slowly over the past 30 years or so, the PMO has vacuumed up many of the erstwhile powers of the crown. This is an unfortunate turn of events, and has subsequently made the PMO far more powerful than the office was ever intended to be. In many w
  10. Why must everyone fit into neat little boxes? Is it not possible to agree with some policies the CPC has broght in while disagreeing with others? Does voting for a party mean you agree with their platform lock stock and barrel? You never disagree with a single thing they do ever? This is the problem with many political "debaters". Calling someone a "leftist" or a "right winger" summarily dismisses their arguments wholesale and shuts down debate as clearly using those terms refutes all possible counter points. In reality we simply cannot make sweeping statements like "no liberal would x
  11. Hmmm, I dare say your assessment is likely a bit premature. I mean in reality, the CPC has not been in power for a full year, and if Mr. Harper holds to his 4 year election law, of which I’m not entirely convinced that he will, he has more than enough time “screw up” enough that his tenuous hold on a majority could slip. Now is not the time to be heavy handed with his majority, but Mr. Harper is merely the latest in a rather long line of autocratic PM’s that began with Trudeau. Let’s be realistic, as has already been pointed out the CPC pulled off a majority sans Quebec, this is no mean f
  12. Agreed, the LPC and NDP are politically disparate enough that a merger wouldn't really work. The LPC are more centrist than the NDP, though granted it appears that the NDP are starting to be viewed as more mainstream than they were previously and seem to be the natural successors to the LPC’s former place as alternative to the CPC. However, until they put away some of their more extreme ideas, such as directly interfering in how businesses do business I don’t think I could support them. I fully expect the CPC war machine to basically ignore the LPC next election, and focus mainly on their
  13. Dave_ON

    .

    Which both have precisely 0 bearing or relevance to Canadian Politics whatsoever. In case BC hasn't chimed in on this one already and I paraphrase him.... "No Canadian political discussion would be complete without a reference to the US"
  14. Dave_ON

    .

    Other than our stockpile BMD's (Beavers of Mass Destruction), absolutely not.
  15. Dave_ON

    .

    We can go on all day about how anyone can fall for any number of schemes that exist in the world. Fact remains they work regardless of whether or not they should. Why do people by things from pop up ads on their computers? Why do they give their Credit Card numbers to strangers over the phone? Why do elderly people have their entire life savings wiped out through various cons? Truth is there's a sucker born every minute, and not everyone is as involved or aware of politics as perhaps the average poster is here. Indeed nothing is proven at all at this point, but there are many lose ends
×
×
  • Create New...