Don't blink!
Harper has bought time because he thinks all of the self interest manifest in the Liberal party will cause this coalition to self destruct. Well to all and their egos, put your self interest aside for a moment.
Leave Dion as leader, install a credible finance minister.. clearly the Libs have a lot more to choose from than the CPC. Continue with the leadership race on the side. Negotiate a set term with the other opposition parties that gives enough time post leadership, and let that new leader will fight the election.
This man called Harper is trying to destroy your party and hurt the country in the process. Let's look at the bigger picture.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
If an election should happen, I estimate the Conservatives would finally get the majority. And it would come from disenchanted blue liberals. Finally (took them long enough) disenchanted by the Liberal hollow rhetoric of financial conservativism. (They would never support bailouts, or other such communist policies.)
Also, let's stop using misleading language like "they are trying to hurt the country". Since each side feels the other side is doing that. Instead, let's make things clear: Harper is trying to minimize government and take less money away from people. The Liberals are trying to increase government and the nanny-state and take more money away from people. Ok? There's no point hiding away from these facts. Many people, maybe even the majority, like the idea of a nanny-state. So, Harper is indeed trying to hurt the nanny-state, and help the freedom-state.
dennis buddy check your facts.. no gov't has spent more than the harper gov't.. if that's minimizing gov't, then he's really doing it in a hidden way..
He's not minimizing nearly as much as he should... but relative to the Liberals or NDP, he definitely is. And, I'm pretty sure if it weren't for the *constant* demands and threats from the socialist opposition, he would be able to minimize it more.
The Liberals make no secret, and are proud of wanting to have a BIG strong government that is capable of babysitting it's sheep and controlling the marketplace. They support bailouts. They support government coercion in free and democratic markets.
I'm really not sure what you're trying to imply. That I should vote Liberal if I want to minimize government??
i'm saying conservative ideology is to minimize gov't but they haven't acted that way.. and it has nothing to do with opposition.. last session they got everything passed cuz the libs even didn't show up or abstained.. so they pretty much had freedom to do whatever they wanted.. and they spent, spent, spent into deficit. the end.
Sigh. You don't seriously believe they "spent their way into deficit" do you? Firstly, they're not in deficit yet, and secondly, you can't possibly seriously believe the Liberals could have taxed a big enough buffer, after all their social spending, to avoid a deficit during this "financial crisis" do you?
I do welcome your criticism against the conservatives on this ground, but am sorely missing similar criticism against the reds.
They would almost certainly have adopted bailout plans, and gone into heavy deficit, and almost certainly have raised taxes to offset all this spending. Don't you agree? Though you probably don't see anything wrong with this :|.
they will be in deficit next year.. that's pretty much confirmed by everyone but flaherty.. this argument is pretty futile anyway.. the libs have encountered a much worse balance book federally.. it's called 1993 and they fixed it by 97.. that wasn't through raising taxes.. it was by making cuts and tough choices.. the difference is that the cons didn't have to make any tough choices.. all they had to do was be prudent.. they failed miserably. in terms of bailouts.. well that's happening everywhere in the world by all stripes of gov't...
Just because everyone else is doing it, doesn't make it right. There is absolutely no need for a bailout. EI is more than generous enough, and there is absolutely no excuse for not being able to find a good job in this land. All the cry-babies who are waiting in line at the tit of the country for their share of free milk are a disgrace. Instead of fairly earning a living, they choose whine and preserve their obsolete (and environmentally detrimental) jobs. And, most importantly of all, *I* do not want my money going to them. I hate their jobs, and will not be able to sleep at night knowing that my honest and hard-earned money is being burned to support their evil jobs! How dare they be so shameless as to demand my money? There should at LEAST be some kind of referendum over this absurd burning of money--if not have it outlawed outright.
lol dude... there are SO many things in the world that are unfair.. paying taxes/premiums in Canada ranks at the lowest end.
You and everyone should nevertheless be against such evils, no matter how insignificant they may appear to you. But, your mistake isn't actually with the prioritization of the evil that is taxation, but rather you think it's perfectly OK if not desirable!
That being said, moreover, I strongly seriously feel you are ignoring the severity of the problem. People have become desensitized to the word: "taxation". It should always be called "Forcing people to pay for things regardless if they agree with it or not", and should be used VERY VERY carefuly, if at all. (Obviously I *strongly* believe there is absolutely no justification for them, but in the spirit of compromise, I would accept Libertarian taxes.)
It honestly offends me when you (and others) casually dismiss the importance of the issue. You clearly do not understand how passionately and violently I am opposed to many so-called "public" institutions... like the military, like the state-education system, like forced-insurance plans. By simply trivializing the issue, you are insulting my STRONG opinions, which I have spent a LOT of time thinking and deciding on, as well as my freedom to choose--which is the foundation of democracy!
Post a Comment