What was your price Stronach??????

[Britney Spears]

She barely won in a long time Liberal riding.  The Liberals there are dancing with glee tonight.  I'd say it was an opportunist move to keep her seat in the next election.  Not bad move at all.....First day in the new Party and already in Cabinet.... Roll Eyes

Seen,  I stand corrected. Thank you.

OTOH, I suppose if the last election was so close, then switching sides does not give her any advantage either? Not with the Adscam and all that anyway.....

 

[canadianblue]

If Stronach truly believed that the party was making a turn for the worse, why not bolt earlier instead of a few days before a major vote. As well I believe some conservative members were allowed free votes on the same sex issue. If Stronach isn't an oppurtunist then why would she only bolt after being bribed with a cabinet position.

When she signed up, the Conservatives were still trying to recreate the glory of the old PC party, which apparently stood for everything we now hold dear., she didn't like the way the Conservative party was going, so she voted with her feet. Is that so hard to believe?

Well, she should have bolted earlier, as well I don't really believe anything she has said as she is a proven liar, and stabbed all of her former friends in the back. A few days earlier she was attending pro-conservative rallies, and rallying the troops. Then some Liberals bribed her with a new cabinet post, as well as the possibility of becoming leader and she is now fully supportive of the liberals. On same sex marriage, the conservatives supported civil union's which isn't that extreme.

But in the end it will never matter, as I think that the Liberal's will be elected for the next century no matter what. As long as they have Ontario and a few seats outside of Ontario they will win.

 

[larry Strong]

As long as they have Ontario and a few seats outside of Ontario they will win.

In the end that might be all they have to govern, besides that east coast.

 

[The_Falcon]

Peter Mansbridge in an interview with Stonach tonight high-lighted the fact that in all votes in the last couple of weeks inlcuding the Conservatives "confidence" motion, she voted to bring down the liberals, plus she had very few kind things to say about the budget, and she attended rallies over the weekend for the Conservatives.  Now all of a sudden she jumps ship, and is immediately given a ministerial portfolio, because of her morals?  BS!! (and I am not referring to her intials)  Its pure political opportunism at its worst.  Anyone who can't see that is blind.  I hope she is quickly turfed during the next election.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The CPC position on same-sex marriage should be treated by a voter as a test of common sense and the ability to think in depth.

If the CPC wins a majority, they sure aren't going to do it purely on the basis of seats won west of Ontario.   If the CPC wins a minority it is going to depend on the support of either Bloc, Liberal, or NDP members (probably in that order) to support any legislation, regardless whether it is a government or private bill.

Now, some questions:

1) Are the Bloc going to support a CPC bill against SSM?
2) The Liberals?
3) NDP?
4) Conservatives elected east of Manitoba?

The pragmatic truth is that the anti-SSM wing of the CPC has no real hope of passing the bill it would like to pass under any conceivable configuration or circumstances, save one - a truly free vote, with the very iffy caveat that the MPs actually reflect the will of the estimated 51% or 52% of Canadians who are against SSM.   I suppose that MPs aren't going to actually be in a hurry to counteract what the provinces have already set in motion.  [And there is also the Senate to be taken into account.  No guesses where the dominant political sympathies in that body lie.]

There are many issues on the federal table with which a voter should be preoccupied, and anti-SSM bills are not one of them.   The supposed prejudices of "conservatives" are an excuse, not a reason.

 

[Britney Spears]

The supposed prejudices of "conservatives" are an excuse, not a reason.

I was using SSM as a catch all for the broadly socially reactionary atmosphere of the conservative party as a whole. Regardless of the technicalities of the actually legislation. The vast majority of voters are not going to be affected in the slightest by any kind of SSM legislation, anti or otherwise, so it is a touchstone of the party's social platform.

 

[xFusilier]

No one is asking though, why is it that...a star member of the opposition, which is supposedly the government in waiting, given the present political climate would cross the floor: because simply put if we were to have a general election tommorrow we would still have a Liberal government.  The CPC has done a piss poor job of representing itself as an alternative to the Liberal Party.  When else in Canada, would there be any doubt that a government which used public funds to enrich its friends and allies, would be out on its ear.  The Liberal government has failed Canada, IMHO so has the Conservative Party.

Make no doubt about it  Belinda Stronach just played Jesus to Paul Martins Lazarus.  Martin will now go down as the man who beat the rap....he gave the Tories no other choice than to put up or shut up, a situation that has largely been abetted by Harpers sabre rattling.  The smart play would have been to bide ones time, vote on the budget, deal with SSM in a way that minimized it as an election issue, and then if once the Gormery Inquiry is tabled (which could only help the opposition) Martin did not call a general election as he promised to do...have a confidence motion, which the NDP and the Bloc would have also voted for...thus eliminating the possible election issue of Harper being in league with the seperatists.  All this is for naught however, Harper is a dead man.  He has lost face to Martin and he will in all likelyhood loose the next general election as well as the leadership of his party.  Lesson to be learned...it is the voters to the Left of the Tory political spectrum that one has to court not the ones to the right...maybe next time they'll elect a leader that understands this.

 

[Dare]

No one is asking though, why is it that...a star member of the opposition, which is supposedly the government in waiting, given the present political climate would cross the floor: because simply put if we were to have a general election tommorrow we would still have a Liberal government.  The CPC has done a piss poor job of representing itself as an alternative to the Liberal Party.  When else in Canada, would there be any doubt that a government which used public funds to enrich its friends and allies, would be out on its ear.  The Liberal government has failed Canada, IMHO so has the Conservative Party.

Make no doubt about it  Belinda Stronach just played Jesus to Paul Martins Lazarus.  Martin will now go down as the man who beat the rap....he gave the Tories no other choice than to put up or shut up, a situation that has largely been abetted by Harpers sabre rattling.  The smart play would have been to bide ones time, vote on the budget, deal with SSM in a way that minimized it as an election issue, and then if once the Gormery Inquiry is tabled (which could only help the opposition) Martin did not call a general election as he promised to do...have a confidence motion, which the NDP and the Bloc would have also voted for...thus eliminating the possible election issue of Harper being in league with the seperatists.  All this is for naught however, Harper is a dead man.  He has lost face to Martin and he will in all likelyhood loose the next general election as well as the leadership of his party.  Lesson to be learned...it is the voters to the Left of the Tory political spectrum that one has to court not the ones to the right...maybe next time they'll elect a leader that understands this.

It is Conservative Liberal (and NDP for that matter (yes, they exist )) voters that the Conservatives need to court. Not the left. Otherwise they simply become another Liberal party (another party divided amongst drastically different ideals). Sure they need a "big tent", but they must not compromise on their foundings. The Conservatives could easily out do the Liberal party if they had any marketting sense. The media is not their friend and they have to realize that and work with it, as the Bush administration did, in order to win. They don't get their message out effectively and are always a few steps behind the public debate. Which all stems from being too timid and decentralized. I suspect this election things will be far different than previous elections. They've learned some key lessons. Namely, what not to do in the week before the election and who not to listen to for advice.. as for losing face, this isn't Imperialist Japan. Our politicians lose face every day they yell like monkeys in Parliament. It doesn't seem to bother them then, why would it be any different now. They'll carry on, and from what I have seen, Harper is still a good choice, but time only time will tell.

 

[JBP]

This is one of those Karl Rove style talking points that pisses me off to no end. Why the hell is "Consistency" a good thing? Should I vote for a candidate to prepare us for a war with the Soviet Union? Completely ridiculous, but CONSISTENT for the last 15 years, which is apparently a great thing right? During the last US pres. campaign, every time I hear someone call John Kerry a "flip flopper" I feel the urge to double tap him. Yes, the man changes his opinion. anyone with half a brain would, because THE WORLD DOESN'T STAY THE SAME!.

Well, if you read my post, I said "most" people like consistency "overall", not "I" like it... Hence why I posted I don't disagree or agree with her move or motives...

And it's true that most people like consistency, look at the way our world is run... How do you get a higher credit score? consistent credit accounts in good standing, consistent address and job for 3+ years minimum. How do you gain someone's trust? Consistently proving to someone you're reliable and they can count on you. For most people, they gain emotional and social recognition for the length of time they stick to thier guns and do thier thing in a consistent manner. Terry Fox? Imagine what his legacy would have been like if he said, "Ahhh crap, this is rediculous, let's try something else! It's too hard to run all the way across Canada...".. I know that's comparing apples to oranges, but I just use it to expose my point more openly...

So, again, whose voting Green Party?  .... Just kidding.... Again... Still working on which party I'll vote for...

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I was using SSM as a catch all for the broadly socially reactionary atmosphere of the conservative party as a whole. Regardless of the technicalities of the actually legislation. The vast majority of voters are not going to be affected in the slightest by any kind of SSM legislation, anti or otherwise, so it is a touchstone of the party's social platform.

Reactionary?  The Conservatives are trying to maintain the status quo - it is the Liberals who are jumping at every new social cause like a dog chases after a bone.

 

[Old Sweat]

Michael,

What do you have against dogs? Canines give their loyalty openly and without reservation, a quality that is demonstrably lacking in the Liberal Party of Canada.

 

[SeanNewman]

This if for those who challenged my post on page 3:

Yes, we swear our oath/affirmation to the Queen, but are you honestly going to tell me that if the queen dies you will lay down your arms?  If the governor general goes down, are you quitting?

Give me a break.

"The Queen" does not mean Ezlizabeth II, "The Queen" means all that Canada stands for, in which people cast votes, and as such, the party in power = what the people wanted = that's your boss = it's your duty to support them.

Saying that you have civie-power to cast your vote and complain about the gov't is not true (or perhaps a half-truth).  You have a right to vote, and you have basic human rights, but never forget service before self. 

 

[George Wallace]

........, and as such, the party in power = what the people wanted = that's your boss = it's your duty to support them.

NO!

I do not serve the Party in Power.   I server the Government of Canada, lead (Influenced) by the Party in Power.   There is a big difference.  

 

[2 Cdo]

Exactly, remember a politcian by any other name is still a power grubbing, self centered leach. They only exist to fatten their own wallets, in some cases courtesy of daddy, at the publics expense.

As for telling people that they have no right to complain because they serve in the military is asinine. Didn't the nazis try blind obedience once as an excuse?

 

[Lance Wiebe]

Well, I think that Belinda will make a fine Liberal.

She has demonstrated a complete lack of integrity, loyalty and honesty. 

Ergo, she'll fit in fine with Martin's crowd.  Good riddance to her.

 

[Gunnar]

I've seen that a lot lately...the crypto-Liberals are leaving the party.  It's as if they suddenly learned the concept of integrity, or Conservatism, and they don't like it.

For years, the PC's (also known as Liberals with blue ties) campaigned on the same soft, centrist, anything-is-negotiable approach as the Liberals.  This lost them conservative votes--because when there's no difference between either party, you vote for the guy you think won't mess things up TOO badly....except that you see them as all the same...hell, for years they were...

Now that the Conservatives actually have a platform again, people are suspicious.  What's this "accomplishing things" agenda?  How do we know you aren't the same old same old?  Why should be believe that?  They've been trained for years that politics doesn't matter...so while they continue to vote (and you have to wonder why), they vote for what makes them feel comfortable...simple, understandably corrupt Liberals...

Personally, I don't get it.

A man in a bar sidles up to an attractive woman.  It's obvious he'd like to take her home with him.  He introduces himself, is charming...he chats nicely with the woman.  However, every time the woman gets up from the table to go to the washroom, he rummages through her purse for money, and buys another round of drinks.  Eventually, the "free" drinks catch up with the woman, and her inebriation overpowers her good sense, and she goes to a motel with the guy.

The next morning she wakes up alone, in a place she doesn't recognize.  She's been used for someone else's purposes, has a terrible hangover, and doesn't have enough money in her purse to get home.  She has to pay for the motel room on her credit card, and then she has to walk across town in yesterday's clothes to work overtime at her job.  Overtime hours she didn't want to take, in order to be able to pay the rent because there's no more money in her purse...and she's still been used.

What do you think about the guy who did this?  A guy who'd use a woman's own money as a means of exploiting her?  Would you count him as the greatest friend this woman ever had?  Would you advise the woman to write down his phone number in case she wanted to date him again? 

You would if you were Canadian.  The woman is the Canadian Taxpayer.  The man is Paul Martin. 

Think about it. 

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I disagree, SeanNewman.  My oath is to EIIR, btgoG, etc.  No more, no less.  That shouldn't and can't be "translated" into what you believe "Canada stands for".

In response to 2CDO, it would appear Intelligere feels about his oath the same way too many felt about

I swear by God, this Holy Oath, that I will give unlimited obedience to the Führer of the German Reich and People, Adolf Hitler, and as a brave soldier will stake my life for this oath at any time.

Obedience to Hitler by name.  Not the ideals of Germany, God or Man, but to Hitler.  Not a great situation that had some pretty desperate consequences.

 

[LowRider]

The events of the past few weeks are a prime example of why we are doomed to a Liberal Dictatorship.
Martin has been galavanting around the Country throwing bribes at everyone and their dog in order to hold onto power.
The Liberals have a powerful propaganda machine in the CBC.How else could they be involved in the largest political scandal in Canadian history,and end up making the Conservatives look like the bad guys?
It's ironic how they portray Harper as villan who would destroy Canada,when in reality it is the Liberals who will destroy this country if they manage to get reelected.If we do go to the polls this summer the BQ will surely gain seats in Quebec,and if the Liberals get Elected there will be a referendum,and Quebec will seperate.it's possible Alberta may be next.
Bottom line.The Liberals are like a scoolyard bully,If you don't stand up for yourself they will keep taking your lunchmoney.

 

[SeanNewman]

Two things:
1.  Service before self.
2.  Ours is not to reason why...

You don't have to agree with who leads the country, but it's your duty as a SERVICE member to do what they say.  You have your vote (self), but if the rest of the people puts a certain party in power that you don't like, your "self" pipers down and you do what you're told, or you hand in your uniform.

A civie can have their vote and then gripe about the winner until the cows come home, but that does not change the fact that you signed up to serve for this country.  That is reflected by the laws and wishes of the party in power.

Nobody forced you into this job.  If you want to moan and complain about people in government, quit your job and become a reporter.  I choose to support my chain of command from the top to the bottom.  

Griping solves nothing, and the squeaky wheel at the end of the day just sounds like it's whining.

 

[Fideo]

I wonder if you read what you wrote in the last couple posts of yours?  You seem to contradict yourself in your reasons for coming to Canada and a "free" vote if you only see the Liberals as the only alternative.  You have put yourself back into your "One Party Democracy" that you said you have left, and now made it Canada.  Thanks a whole bunch for that!  ???

I can't see your logic of the Bloc gaining much more power than they have now, as they are not a "National" Party, but only a "Regional" Party, with no hopes of ever gaining a majority in Parliament.  The Conservatives, on the other hand, are a National Party, with candidates in all Provinces and Territories, and could form a majority government if so elected.  The Liberals have no major power base in Quebec, so they face no real loses there, but perhaps the Conservatives can make some inroads there and work on change. 

At the looks of things, some people are accusing others of faults they themselves hold.  People acting like sheep and believing all the fearmongering of the corrupt Liberals are leading us down a very slippery slope.  Yes you can vote, or not vote, for whomever you choose in Canada, but if you truly want change, you may have to 'bit the bullet' and vote for change, not spoil a ballot, not vote for a 'Protest' Party, not vote for a "Regional' Party, nor vote for a "Fringe' Party, BUT VOTE for the OPPOSITION PARTY.  Your chance to step up to bat is coming..........

OK George..I believe in more than a one Party Democracy let me just state that. I just don't believe in a full RIGHT Conservative party. Hence the word PROGRESSIVE. Thats another reason why I think stronach crossed the floor....she still is a Progressive candidate...A reason why many voters lost faith in the PROGRESSIVE Conservative is because they lost exactly that major element in their platform. Sorry, if we were to base stronachs decision on ambition I believe in that....in that she has the ambition to make a positive change for Canadians.....not side with the Bloc to win the majority and become the new Prime Minister. I don't believe the Bloc has a major power outlook...sorry if you misunderstood me...they do however hold much more power and if we looked at a referendum right now..guess what...we would be looking at a separated Canada. Thats why I still believe Stronachs decision was a moral one. She still understands that her party might loose and she still jumped....you gotta commend her courage and boldness. I'm 25 years old and I don't have all the answers in the world George...just my opinion. I came here alone with a translator when I was 9 years old while my parents mopped floors and served tables for a living here waiting for me...and I'm damn proud to be Canadian and enjoy the freedom both of us have to discuss politics without someone holding a gun to our head and telling us to vote for a single party. Neither am I telling you to vote a certain direction....just why I'm voting Red. I still don't understand why your thanking me when you still have as much a voice in a ballot as I do. As for you stating that a (spoiled Ballot) is a ballot that chooses no change....to me a spoiled ballot is an empty ballot...which is unfortunate for a lot of Canadians my age who choose not to vote. (Ill leave it at that....good times though  ) Cheers.