Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dave_ON

  1. Indeed a point that has been ignored, perhaps AW should actually listen to her names sake song
  2. Agreed though correct me if I'm wrong this would require a modification to the Constitution to do so. I would think that since it is supposed to be regional representation, we should at least let the appropriate Premieres make the senate appointments. I'm not certain which part of the amendment formula this would require to implement however. I do agree with Benz that having the Senate as an appointment of the PM somewhat defeats the purpose of its original intent.
  3. Ah yes the oft used "The CPC is no worse than the Liberals" argument that is indeed a classic and never waxes old in the least. The CPC was supposed to hold to a higher standard for the senate than the LPC before them, this was one of their major criticisms of the LPC. Now previously the CPC and their supporters would blame the fact that the senate was stacked with LPC party hacks, now it's stacked with CPC hacks. Then they complained that it was the opposition parties and the fact that Harper had only a minority that was the roadblock to reform. Now we're left with the tired ol' excuse
  4. I've noticed that the CBC has had a lot of "WikiLeaks" articles of late. Does anyone actually know how credible WikiLeaks is or where they source their information. They seem to have access to a rather unusual number of sensitive items, which to me makes their information suspect.
  5. Actually the north pole belongs to the elves, Santa usurped their birth rite.
  6. Well there's an easy solution to the weather problem, allow the Turks and Caicos to join Confederation. Sadly the attempt failed the first time but I say we give it another try. That way we can still live in Canada, and have our warm weather too! They're already a British territory. The only downside is that pesky constitutional amendment... http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/turksandcaicos/ But to the thread at hand. I would tend to agree that our system is not at all the problem, merely the way party's work. I think that there does need to be a great deal more accountability of the pa
  7. Fair? Why does fair matter? You fail to understand on a fundamental level what the Monarch really is. It's a symbol of our nation, it's a tie to our history, our roots and our heritage. It's a symbol, that unites and should not be politicized so it will ultimately divide. How the Monarch is chosen, yes I use the word chosen, is rather immaterial, it's what the Monarch represents that matters more than anything. Yes succession is an older method of choosing, but the fact remains, we choose as Canadians to continue with the system we currently have. We're not forced into it as you seem to
  8. I don't understand your hangup on the whole matter. What are you implying, that Canada is somehow still subject to the British, simply because our Queen, the Queen of Canada that is, is also the Queen of Britania, Australia, New Zealand, Turks and the Caicos, and several other realms? There was no need or reason to change the monarch, though we could have. I fail to see your point. She's not the Queen of Canada because she is the Queen of Britain, she's the Queen of Canada, because our constitution states thus. We chose to maintain the same monarch as Britain, not because we were constrai
  9. But that's precisely the point you're missing, while yes the direct succession is determined by the act of settlement that could easily be changed. Perhaps even my family could be selected and I could be come King of Canada. "could" is the key word, but I think that's all rather immaterial. The crown is eternal, the person who occupies the title of monarch is not, nor are they particularly relevant. Why must head of state be open to all people? I don't feel that's more "fair" or modern, just different. It grinds against your world view, I get that, but you're operating from the premise t
  10. I don't underestimate the contributions of the west to getting to where they are today. However, the west, especially Alberta it seems is far far to quick to undersell the vast contributions of those maritimers that came, built, worked on the structure that allowed the west to be settled, this includes Ontario and even Benz version of French Canada . Keep in mind from NB's perspective, everything that isn't PEI, NS or NFLD is "the west" Maritimers are not money sucking lazy [email protected]$tards. They're hard working people that contributed greatly to what this country is today. Time, shifting econ
  11. Lol you really don't want to get into a debate over the place of the monarchy and the constitution with G Bambino... unless you want to lose of course.
  12. My earlier responses/questions got buried it seems, so I'll restate them. Why precisely should we change a system that has worked for nearly 4 centuries simply because it's old? What benefit is there to an elected head of state over a hereditary one? Do you believe that a Muslim president would EVER get elected or even someone married to a Muslim? Is the US not bound by it's own set of traditions and conventions that are equally archaic? Thus far you've talked much about the fact as to Canada needing to change from a successive Monarchy but have failed to outline any benefits as to why, o
  13. Technically since our current monarchy is from the 17th century, it originated in the modern era. The mideval period ended close to a centruy and a half prior to the act of settlement, two and a half if you are of the mind that it ended circa 1300. Either way the Renaissance era was even gone by the time our current monarchy came to be. The fact that the monarch is human is immaterial, the Crown is what is important not the person who occupies the position of monarch. If one monarch fails, abdicates or what have you, the act of settlement provides stipulations for who will succeed that p
  14. I wouldn't say a lesser extent NB for fishing. You also forgot to mention the timber from NB as well as the coal from both NS and NB that helped the push west and the ship building industry which allowed for international trade. I think that the Maritimes are a cautionary tale for the West, but for the grace of God so go you. Coal and lumber were big money back in the day and the maritimes had a wealth of it. Things change, ships aren't built of wood and coal isn't burned like it used to be.
  15. Oh I agree with you. Then again, how effective were the Turner Liberals after the final Trudeau Majority? I just think it's interesting that the CPC lost a seat by 9 votes in a recount. It just brings to mind again is this the start of a new Era for the NDP or a blip on the political radar never to be repeated? Guess we'll have to wait 4 whole years to find out.
  16. Where I think GH is confused, is that he fails to realize that Queen of the United Kingdom is but one of QEII's titles, she's also Queeen of Canada, Australia and many other commonwealth realms.
  17. You've failed to demonstrate your point, because something is old does not make it useless. On the Contrary I would say that in terms of systems of governments it makes it all the more useful. How does it not server the purpose it did in the past? Please explain how the Monarchy has failed to fulfill it's role? It's difficult by design precisely because it shouldn't be changed on a whim. If the change is truly desired it must be worked for, thus we prevent half-hearted whimsical changes to the foundation of our society. What do we gain by electing a head of state other than politici
  18. Why should the head of state be politicized? Why must all officials be elected? There is already electoral fatigue in Canada, for our standard 4-5 year elections. This quick succession of minority governments and the steady decline in voter participation illustrates that. Christ I can't imagine constantly having to elect someone every other month for some type of post like you do in the US. I just don't get the why people are convinced that EVERYONE needs to be elected to be "truly" democratic. Our current system has worked fine for the better part of 4 centuries, what do we gain by chan
  19. Talk about a narrow victory, 9 votes! http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/05/14/cv-election-recount-ndp-quebec-seat.html That changes the seat count to CPC 166 and NDP 102
  20. Your point is what precisely, the corporations and CEO's should set the corporate tax rate? It's a good idea just because you love Harper and he can do no wrong? We already have one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world, there's not justifiable reason why we should lower it further. Certainly not in lieu of increasing spending. Or is it your position that reducing revenue while increasing spending is in fact a very good idea? What real benefit will lowering corporate taxes further really serve? Do we know for certain that this will be reinvested in the company? Will it magicall
  21. Yet I fully anticipate that both the CPC and their supporters will have a litany of excuses prepared when they fail to be fiscally conservative. It's already begun, spending has increased while they've cut taxes, you cannot do both, that's utterly foolish. I fully expect the throne and mace of parliament to be up on the auction block in the near future to help curtail the shortfall Also sit tight, if you always wanted to live in Stornaway, I'm certain that will be on the market soon enough now that Flahrety can go all 407 on all crown assets.
  22. Agreed, but this further demonstrates the NDP was not ready to rise to the station of official opposition. Further the LPC needs this time of renewal, hopefully they avail themselves of this opportunity and they take this time to involve the entire party in the rebuilding process and get back in touch with the grassroots. Like it or lump it, there is no one in a position at present to oppose the CPC, so we're in for a rocky 4 years on some issues. It's my hope that the NDP or the LPC, not both, are in a position to give the CPC a run for their money next election. Having only one party cap
  23. I have lots of suggestions for cuts that wouldn't make people angry, the CBC isn't one of them, no more hockey night in Canada? I think not. How about reducing the number of ministers this go round? Harper had one of the largest ministries in recent history. How about cut his personal security expense? No other PM seemed to need quite as much security. Get rid of the vote subsidy AND the tax credit for political donations. That reduces spending and increases revenue in one shot. Scrap the gun registry which as it currently is, fees being waived, is draining revenues. Scrap all federal
  24. I don't think the CPC can in good faith support a Pro-Insite position as it's not particularly compatible with their "tough on crime" stance.
  • Create New...