HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

Vote

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-29-2004, 05:17 PM
  #101
PineJockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: E-Town
Posts: 616
vCash: 500
Last one, and then back to hockey

When laying everything on eastern voters, keep in mind, As Paul Wells points out, the Liberals received more points in the popular vote in this year's election than in 2000 in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba (ie., the west).

http://www.macleans.ca/paulwells

PineJockey is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 05:21 PM
  #102
get yer Aivazoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: a little left of centre
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
Your absolutely right, Albertans will consistently vote Conservative and quite often as a protest vote towards Ottawa. The problem is not that the East votes Liberal, the problem is that Ontario and Quebecers DECIDE the election. Conferderation has not been properly set up to stop the concentration of power from the population rich Central Canada. You see the Americans realized early on that the political sway of populous states could create animosity and tear at the Republic. That's why they created electoral systems like the triple E senate and the electoral college. Canada hasn't done this and as result Albertans feel left out of the process come election time. It's easy too say, "come up with policies that the East like" or "vote in Liberal" but that's the crux of the problem. Easterners can view both parties platforms and choose the one that suits them. Westerners don't get that choice we're stuck with what Central Canada wants for government.

And I will remind you that Alberta has the most educated populace in the country.
Us Canajuns are jus simple folk, see? We flunked outta electrical college!

I think that you're misplacing your anger when you direct it against Eastern voters in yesterday's election. I think most Canadians (maybe just not the ones in politics -- ) probably would be open to electoral reform if it really makes for a fairer setup. But electoral reform was frankly not an issue at all in yesterday's election. Not east of Manitoba, anyway. Not at all! Not one bit!

A non-Conservative vote from an Ontarian or Maritimer was not a vote to stop Alberta from getting a larger say in government. It was a vote against right-wing social agendas that those voters felt were unrepresentative of their values.

It's ironic that the East is being blasted in this thread for being ultra-leftist, and also blasted because they're not open enough to fair and equitable reform of the electoral process. ??? Most Canadians would be totally willing to see some kind of electoral compromise that can work for Albertans (though not at the expense of everybody else). But most Canadians certainly don't care enough about the issue to vote in a pro-life, pro-military, anti-green, pro-deficit party just to see it happen. And you can't blame them for that!

.

get yer Aivazoff is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 05:28 PM
  #103
PineJockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: E-Town
Posts: 616
vCash: 500
Dang, one more.

And I will agree with you, that if you really believe that voters are so different in the west and east that they cannot be reconciled by a single party, that separation, or constitutional reform, or whatever, is appropriate. But, I think that a Conservative platform, presented properly, can easily be acceptable to eastern voters. The problem, as I mentioned earlier, is that the Conservatives ran on a "We are not the Liberals" platform, instead of cogently outlining what their platform is, and how it would improve the life of joe-citizen. I like lots of the Conservative ideas, I'm not opposed to them. I just wish I knew what they were. Part of it can be blamed on the fact that they hadn't had a policy convention yet, but part of it can also be blamed on poor election strategy.

Edit: As only one example, it was Ontario that not only elected, but re-elected the Mike Harris Conservative gov't giving it a mandate to slash spending and cut taxes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
Your absolutely right, Albertans will consistently vote Conservative and quite often as a protest vote towards Ottawa. The problem is not that the East votes Liberal, the problem is that Ontario and Quebecers DECIDE the election. Conferderation has not been properly set up to stop the concentration of power from the population rich Central Canada. You see the Americans realized early on that the political sway of populous states could create animosity and tear at the Republic. That's why they created electoral systems like the triple E senate and the electoral college. Canada hasn't done this and as result Albertans feel left out of the process come election time. It's easy too say, "come up with policies that the East like" or "vote in Liberal" but that's the crux of the problem. Easterners can view both parties platforms and choose the one that suits them. Westerners don't get that choice we're stuck with what Central Canada wants for government.

And I will remind you that Alberta has the most educated populace in the country.


Last edited by PineJockey: 06-29-2004 at 05:44 PM.
PineJockey is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 05:33 PM
  #104
get yer Aivazoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: a little left of centre
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PineJockey
Dang, one more.

And I will agree with you, that if you really believe that voters are so different in the west and east that they cannot be reconciled by a single party, that separation, or constitutional reform, or whatever, is appropriate. But, I think that a Conservative platform, presented properly, can easily be acceptable to eastern voters.
If I knew how to add the applause smiley, you'd get it.

(Though I would say "might be" appropriate.)

.

get yer Aivazoff is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 05:35 PM
  #105
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
Your absolutely right, Albertans will consistently vote Conservative and quite often as a protest vote towards Ottawa. The problem is not that the East votes Liberal, the problem is that Ontario and Quebecers DECIDE the election. Conferderation has not been properly set up to stop the concentration of power from the population rich Central Canada. You see the Americans realized early on that the political sway of populous states could create animosity and tear at the Republic. That's why they created electoral systems like the triple E senate and the electoral college. Canada hasn't done this and as result Albertans feel left out of the process come election time. It's easy too say, "come up with policies that the East like" or "vote in Liberal" but that's the crux of the problem. Easterners can view both parties platforms and choose the one that suits them. Westerners don't get that choice we're stuck with what Central Canada wants for government.
The electoral college? You gotta be kidding me - prime example of good concept ruined. Please don't refer to the electoral college as an example of good government as it is not.

As far as Westeners getting stuck with the form of government that Central Canada wants... well... look at your stats again.

39.1 - Conservative --- 59.4 - Liberal / NDP / Green : _,472,796 : Manitoba
41.8 - Conservative --- 53.3 - Liberal / NDP / Green : _,425,946 : Saskatchewan
61.6 - Conservative --- 37.7 - Liberal / NDP / Green : 1,270,815 : Alberta
36.2 - Conservative --- 61.6 - Liberal / NDP / Green : 1,724,618 : British Columbia
17.2 - Conservative --- 82.8 - Liberal / NDP / Green : _,_13,471 : Northwest Territories
20.9 - Conservative --- 75.8 - Liberal / NDP / Green : _,_11,878 : Yukon

By % = 184,863 + 178,045 + 782,822 + 624,312 + 2,317 + 2,483 = 1,774,842 / 3,919,524 = 0.45 = 45%

The Conservatives are NOT a majority in West - not even close. The West, like Canada, wants a left-leaning governement. And, not surprisingly, they got one.

The West isn't alienated from Canada - just your proclivity to get things the way you want them because you want them that way regardless of what the majority of Canadians want is.


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 05:39 PM
  #106
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by get yer Aivazoff
I think that you're misplacing your anger when you direct it against Eastern voters in yesterday's election. I think most Canadians (maybe just not the ones in politics -- ) probably would be open to electoral reform if it really makes for a fairer setup. But electoral reform was frankly not an issue at all in yesterday's election. Not east of Manitoba, anyway. Not at all! Not one bit!

A non-Conservative vote from an Ontarian or Maritimer was not a vote to stop Alberta from getting a larger say in government. It was a vote against right-wing social agendas that those voters felt were unrepresentative of their values.
DON'T YOU SEE THATIS THE PROBLEM! People who you should feel obligated to (as we are to you through the current political system whether we like it or not) you don't care! We are crying out for a voice in governing this nation you love so much, but it isn't an issue to you guys!!! How can you not understand that we, of course, are going to want to leave if we will not be allowed (much less assisted) in making changes that give us a voice!?

Quote:
It's ironic that the East is being blasted in this thread for being ultra-leftist, and also blasted because they're not open enough to fair and equitable reform of the electoral process. ??? Most Canadians would be totally willing to see some kind of electoral compromise that can work for Albertans (though not at the expense of everybody else). But most Canadians certainly don't care enough about the issue to vote in a pro-life, pro-military, anti-green, pro-deficit party just to see it happen. And you can't blame them for that!

.
Although you say, ya... sure... whatever... it'd be ok to do it - it's next to a non-issue to you! I most definately CAN blame them picking to call Harper a militarist because he wants to be able to be a useful member of the international community by not needing assistance, JUST TO OFFER assistance. We can't get our troops from point A to point B..... so OH, Harper, YOU Fascist gun loving hick- we don't need military upgrades! pro-life.... Harper... that horrible person has holds values that are set out in the bible- although he has said he would put the whole abbortion to a vote- not make a judgement himself. Harper, you pro-deficet person you.... You are using economic philosophy that has made the USA the richest country in the world, and Alberta the richest province....YOU FOOL Harper! Sure....he'd give ome of our fellow citizens a say - but that's not very important to me as long as I have MY say!

__________________
http://hfboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=160 - the Unofficial HF Political board
thome_26 is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 05:42 PM
  #107
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by YKOil
The electoral college? You gotta be kidding me - prime example of good concept ruined. Please don't refer to the electoral college as an example of good government as it is not.

As far as Westeners getting stuck with the form of government that Central Canada wants... well... look at your stats again.

39.1 - Conservative --- 59.4 - Liberal / NDP / Green : _,472,796 : Manitoba
41.8 - Conservative --- 53.3 - Liberal / NDP / Green : _,425,946 : Saskatchewan
61.6 - Conservative --- 37.7 - Liberal / NDP / Green : 1,270,815 : Alberta
36.2 - Conservative --- 61.6 - Liberal / NDP / Green : 1,724,618 : British Columbia
17.2 - Conservative --- 82.8 - Liberal / NDP / Green : _,_13,471 : Northwest Territories
20.9 - Conservative --- 75.8 - Liberal / NDP / Green : _,_11,878 : Yukon

By % = 184,863 + 178,045 + 782,822 + 624,312 + 2,317 + 2,483 = 1,774,842 / 3,919,524 = 0.45 = 45%

The Conservatives are NOT a majority in West - not even close. The West, like Canada, wants a left-leaning governement. And, not surprisingly, they got one.

The West isn't alienated from Canada - just your proclivity to get things the way you want them because you want them that way regardless of what the majority of Canadians want is.


YKOil
Conservatives won a majority in B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba...... That is what I consider the west... I consider the territories the territores or the North. There isn't just a majority there....there is a MASSIVE majority there.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 05:50 PM
  #108
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
Conservatives won a majority in B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba...... That is what I consider the west... I consider the territories the territores or the North. There isn't just a majority there....there is a MASSIVE majority there.
Ahhh...

So yes, they won a majority of the seats, in a non-representational system based on winner take all.

Yet...

They didn't win a majority of the votes.

So...

Given that your complaint rests on the arguement of not being represented properly and you are actually against representation one has to ask the questions:

You are a hypocrite? Or just confused?


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 05:52 PM
  #109
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil slick
No, read my position. I said the tax cuts would run a deficit. We as a country have run up a hell of a debt, and I think its time for us to pay. I don't mind the GST at all.
My point was meant to imply that during the Liberals first run they were promising the elimination of the GST. That never happened and yet despite that you seem pretty content with the Liberals in office.

Therefor even if you don't believe that the Conservatives can deliver on their tax cuts, what does it matter? It just seems like a bit of a double standard.

If they manage to cut taxes, GREAT, they proved they could do it. If they don't then they are no worse than the Liberals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oil slick
From the stats I've seen. The sponsorship scandal cost well less than 100 million (100 million is the total spent). Chump change. The gun registry is more but again well less than a billion a year, again chump change compared to the 16 billion dollars tax cut.
Well from my recollection of misappropriated monies;

250 million suspect from ADscam
160 million from military computer contracts (nothing provided)
1 billion from Jane Stewart before the last election
2 billion forthe gun registry
101 million to bombardier for 2 Prime Ministers jets
1.2 billion unaccounted for by native affairs
EI surplus of 43.8 billion

So with a number of 48 + billion do you think that our money is spent wisely?


Quote:
Originally Posted by oil slick
Gay marriage
He has said that he would never use the "not withstanding clause" on gay mariage (or for abortion).
He said that he does not oppose legal rights to gay couples.
He does question the use of the definition of "marriage" and wants to define it as a "civil union".

All of which was also PM's position during the Liberal leadership run - in case your interested.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 05:55 PM
  #110
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
DON'T YOU SEE THATIS THE PROBLEM! People who you should feel obligated to (as we are to you through the current political system whether we like it or not) you don't care! We are crying out for a voice in governing this nation you love so much, but it isn't an issue to you guys!!! How can you not understand that we, of course, are going to want to leave if we will not be allowed (much less assisted) in making changes that give us a voice!?
This argument is bordering on silly. So you are saying we should have voted Conservative in order to make you happy. So next election, we'll all turn off our T.V.'s and just listen to who Alberta is voting for, and we'll vote for them to, ignoring what ever issues may be brought up?

Here's an idea... how about not electing people to represent you who are so far out there socially that they scare the hell out of everyone. He did nothing to give me a reason to vote for him, and only provided reasons not to vote for him. He didn't even pull the national unity card and explain the thoughts of the Westerners. Or how the country is too divided and we need to be unified. He didn't pull the patriotic card at all.

[/quote]Although you say, ya... sure... whatever... it'd be ok to do it - it's next to a non-issue to you! I most definately CAN blame them picking to call Harper a militarist because he wants to be able to be a useful member of the international community by not needing assistance, JUST TO OFFER assistance. We can't get our troops from point A to point B..... so OH, Harper, YOU Fascist gun loving hick- we don't need military upgrades![/quote]

I have no problems with military upgrades... just don't tell me you are going to cut taxes and balance the budget too. I'm not a complete moron.

Quote:
pro-life.... Harper... that horrible person has holds values that are set out in the bible- although he has said he would put the whole abbortion to a vote- not make a judgement himself.
Hey, guess what else is in the bible, and it's actually a commandment?

You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor

Yet, you seem to be coveting what the East has... but do we really need to get into this. The bible should not be brought into discussions about politics... it's not the dark ages anymore.

Quote:
Harper, you pro-deficet person you.... You are using economic philosophy that has made the USA the richest country in the world,
Back up a second... the USA also has a National Debt of $4 trillion. The economic philosophy has to be different between the United States and Canada. The United States also doesn't have the social programs we do, nor do they subsidise Education like Canada does. Apples and Oranges here.

Quote:
and Alberta the richest province....YOU FOOL Harper! Sure....he'd give ome of our fellow citizens a say - but that's not very important to me as long as I have MY say!
Alberta the richest province? Is that because the econimcal stability a man like Harper brings, or is it because of a certain natural resource? People in Saudi Arabia live way better than I ever will, but it doesn't mean it's a smart economical stance.

Why is your individual say more important than mine? Your say over the course of the country is as important as my say is. You shouldn't have more of a say in your vote than I have in mine. If I don't beleive in someone, I won't vote for them... it has nothing to do with you not having your say, but everything to do with me educating myself so that I can have my say.

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.

Last edited by dawgbone: 06-29-2004 at 06:09 PM.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 06:07 PM
  #111
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
EI surplus of 43.8 billion

So with a number of 48 + billion do you think that our money is spent wisely?
And this is what scares me...

What if the economy goes to crap again, and the unemployment rate goes through the roof?

You start dipping into a set of funds stored away for a particular reason, and you are going to regret it. That set of funds should be for emergency use only, whether that is a flood or a call to arms or whatever.

That is actually one of the smartest moves the Liberals have made. We've seen numerous economic crisis's in the past 100 years, and those should be warning enough.

Quote:
He has said that he would never use the "not withstanding clause" on gay mariage (or for abortion).
He said that he does not oppose legal rights to gay couples.
He does question the use of the definition of "marriage" and wants to define it as a "civil union".
Umm...

"Randy White, who said a Conservative government would redefine the Charter of Rights and use the notwithstanding clause to overrule court rulings it doesn't agree with, such as gay marriage."

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...tacodalogin=no

It's not all about what the party leaders say...

When one of your members goes out and says this, you are in deep crap, especially when it is over an issue like this.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 06:11 PM
  #112
oil slick
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
My point was meant to imply that during the Liberals first run they were promising the elimination of the GST. That never happened and yet despite that you seem pretty content with the Liberals in office.

Therefor even if you don't believe that the Conservatives can deliver on their tax cuts, what does it matter? It just seems like a bit of a double standard.

If they manage to cut taxes, GREAT, they proved they could do it. If they don't then they are no worse than the Liberals.
IMO this promise is worse than the Liberals because the liberals just lied to me... If the conservatives just scrapped the tax cut, I'd be fine with it, but I think they'll just run up a deficit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
Well from my recollection of misappropriated monies;

250 million suspect from ADscam
160 million from military computer contracts (nothing provided)
1 billion from Jane Stewart before the last election
2 billion forthe gun registry
101 million to bombardier for 2 Prime Ministers jets
1.2 billion unaccounted for by native affairs
EI surplus of 43.8 billion

So with a number of 48 + billion do you think that our money is spent wisely?
EI is not being wasted, it's being spent on things like health care, debt payments, and mispent on Jane stewart and ADscam. Only 5 billion of the 48 billion is actually being wasted (as you showed in your numbers). So you have 5 billion over the last 5 years. Maybe other government waste = another billion a year, and I'm being very optimistic. So you have 2 billion a year he would save. Harper is offering a 16.8 billion a year tax cut. It's not even close to me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
He has said that he would never use the "not withstanding clause" on gay mariage (or for abortion).
He said that he does not oppose legal rights to gay couples.
He does question the use of the definition of "marriage" and wants to define it as a "civil union".

All of which was also PM's position during the Liberal leadership run - in case your interested.
And I think that to be fair to everyone they cannot have dual definitions. And what the hell is this religiouse definition of marriage. I'm straight, but an atheist... I laugh at god. Am I allowed to be "married" - or do I have to belong to the second class "civil unions". What if the unitarians are OK with marrying me? Am I still not allowed to be married?

But that's not the overall point. You have your opinions, I have mine. But the point is that I have opinions that aren't made out of spite for the west. They are relatively well thought out, and they are not made because I want to hoard all the power in Easter Canada. They are made because I made up my pown mind, and I find there is far too many opinions out there that "you either have to be crazy, or an Eastern ******* to not vote concervative."

oil slick is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 06:25 PM
  #113
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
Well from my recollection of misappropriated monies;

250 million suspect from ADscam
160 million from military computer contracts (nothing provided)
1 billion from Jane Stewart before the last election
2 billion forthe gun registry
101 million to bombardier for 2 Prime Ministers jets
1.2 billion unaccounted for by native affairs
EI surplus of 43.8 billion

So with a number of 48 + billion do you think that our money is spent wisely?
copper: Please, please, please try to make your arguements in such a way as to be taken seriously. Misappropriated? You make it sound like the Liberals pocketed every dollar therein. Let me try to present your numbers fairly.

Misappropriated (monies tied to political or personal gain): 250 + 160 + 101 = 511 million dollars

Misspent (monies tied to poor administration): 1 + 2 + 1.2 = 4.2 billion dollars

Those are the ones we are, more or less, sure on. Now, for the EI arguement. This is taken from www.thecannon.ca:

“In 1992, the Unemployment Insurance account stood at $20.5-billion. Of that, $15.3 billion was paid out in benefits to unemployed workers, while the remainder covered costs associated with employment programs, administration, maternity, parental and sickness benefits. In 2002, the EI account stood at roughly the same amount - $20.4 billion. Except that now benefit payments accounted for only $7.2 billion and other costs remained the same at $5.2 billion. The remaining $8 billion - more than had been paid out in benefits - was allocated as a surplus. Without the EI surplus, the Liberal government would have to report a budget deficit, rather than an overall surplus. The EI surplus is now over $40 billion.” The Auditor General has estimated that this surplus is $25 billion more than it needs to be."

Here is an important line to consider: Without the EI surplus, the Liberal government would have to report a budget deficit, rather than an overall surplus.

Think about that for a second. That means that the EI suplus was misspent in regards to paying for other programs as the monies were added to general revenue - i.e. they paid for the mad cow crisis, the black-out in Ontario, the extra 2 billion for the provinces for healthcare, paying down national debt, etc.

Hardly missappropriated in the way you are saying.

The honest arguement is this: the EI funds are collected to pay for people who then need it - by turning those dollars into general dollars the Liberals have missappropriated them.

Regardless - your arguement was a lie when you made it. Please be more accurate in the future. Apparently, over the last 12 years the Liberal party embezzled 500 million (more or less), administrated very poorly another 4.2 billion and then used 40 billion or so EI dollars to cover their ***** just like every other political party would have done (you are fooling yourslef if you think otherwise).

The Liberals deserved the trouncing they got - no question about it.


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 06:25 PM
  #114
get yer Aivazoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: a little left of centre
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
DON'T YOU SEE THATIS THE PROBLEM! People who you should feel obligated to (as we are to you through the current political system whether we like it or not) you don't care! We are crying out for a voice in governing this nation you love so much, but it isn't an issue to you guys!!! How can you not understand that we, of course, are going to want to leave if we will not be allowed (much less assisted) in making changes that give us a voice!?
Wasn't it you that suggested everyone chill out?

I don't feel obligated to you. I am glad that Alberta has oil. I am glad that Alberta has lots of money because it has oil. I am glad that it shares oil with the rest of Canada. I am glad Alberta is in Canada for many other sentimental reasons too, including family ties, the Oilers (remember the Oilers?), our shared heritage, and the fact that we all have a lot more in common than we usually let ourselves think. But you personally, have done squat for me personally, so I do not feel obligated to vote for a political party that will run this country in ways that I abhor in order to support electoral reform. I want you to have a voice in governing the nation. You do have a voice. If you want to change the terms of the arrangement for everybody, I'm cool with putting that on the table too. But it's up to the leaders of the Conservative party to sway public belief in this direction, and so far they have not done it.

In the current arrangement that the Canadian voters (including you) have created, the possibility exists for Harper to work together with the NDP (who also want electoral reform) and the Bloc (who would go along with anything if Quebec gets concessions) to move the issue forward. Currently, they have not created the political will anywhere in the country to make it a priority. That's the reality.

Do not feel that you personally are oppressed unfairly within Canadian society because social leftists will not vote for a right-wing party out of mere gratitude for your personal generosity with your personal oil.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
Although you say, ya... sure... whatever... it'd be ok to do it - it's next to a non-issue to you! I most definately CAN blame them picking to call Harper a militarist because he wants to be able to be a useful member of the international community by not needing assistance, JUST TO OFFER assistance. We can't get our troops from point A to point B..... so OH, Harper, YOU Fascist gun loving hick- we don't need military upgrades! pro-life.... Harper... that horrible person has holds values that are set out in the bible- although he has said he would put the whole abbortion to a vote- not make a judgement himself. Harper, you pro-deficet person you.... You are using economic philosophy that has made the USA the richest country in the world, and Alberta the richest province....YOU FOOL Harper! Sure....he'd give ome of our fellow citizens a say - but that's not very important to me as long as I have MY say!
I do not agree with most of Harper's beliefs (and presumably, by extension, the beliefs of most of his supporters). I do not think is a "Fascist gun loving hick", a "horrible person", etc. I have not once in this thread said anything insulting about Harper. I certainly do not consider him a "FOOL". But I do not agree with his beliefs, and I will not vote for him. That is my right. I do not have any more "say" than you do.

You really seem to believe that "having your say" equals "getting your way".

.

get yer Aivazoff is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 06:35 PM
  #115
Goil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: St Albert
Posts: 568
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Goil
Easy folks...

I should have known better. I just wanted to post a quick message to say get out and do your part. I could care less about your political views, about as much as your religious beliefs.

This kind of stuff is better suited to another forum, so lets take it there ok? I guess I should delete the post but at the same time I started it and I wanted to let you know what my reasoning was...

Anyhow, great to see that all of your are passionate, but maybe we should let this thread die ok?

Dean

PS, sorry!

Goil is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 06:47 PM
  #116
get yer Aivazoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: a little left of centre
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goil
PS, sorry!
Don't be sorry! It's a valuable discussion (even if it is kinda on the wrong board). Nothing really got out of hand or anything, as far as I'm concerned. And I agree with you -- everybody should at least get out there and vote, regardless of who for.

Peace, all.

BTW, I know I don't post a lot in the regular hockey-related topics, but I'm on the board reading all the time (way too often), and I have a lot of respect for everyone here. Just thought I should throw that in.

.

get yer Aivazoff is offline  
Old
06-29-2004, 07:52 PM
  #117
mamettt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Can someone please explain to me what the big problem is out in Alberta?

I hear a lot of complaining, but no actual reasons why there is complaining (even on this board there aren't any explainations)... also with regards to the last comment by theoil (BC, Alberta, Yukon being their own country), I don't feel the same hostility towards the federal government from B.C. that I do from Alberta...

Not being a smart ass, I just don't know what the real issues are (obviously there are some as the Liberals can barely win a seat in Alberta), and how these issues are different from what everyone else faces (i.e. money waste like the sponsorship program).
As someone who left Alberta to live in the United States of America, where I proudly study and work and expect to live in for the rest of my life, I'm not sure I can answer this question. I haven't been there for a while. But I'll take a shot. There are a number of reason. I'll try to liiuminate some. I dont think I'll be able to explain all of them (years of division can't be adequatley dealt with in an internet post). Here goes. Chiefly?

It helps to be shown some respect.

And that begins and the most basic level. Verbally. When was the last time Paul Martin ever said "Alberta is an important part of this nation, we in the east depend on them just as much as they depend on us, their views are worthy of debate, discussion, and consideration...." And I don't mean in some stump speech during a fundraiser or a campaign. I mean real, genuine affection devoid of political motivation. You know, the kind of respect that he routinely gives his base in Ontario. Jean Chretien never gave Albertans that kind of geniune, open, verbal respect. In fact, he said something like "there from alberta/the west, their a little weird" on one occasion. I can't find the link, and I'm clealy paraphrasing, but he did say something akin to that. And that sums up the general feeling the liberals in the east (and a lot of the east is liberal when it comes to federal politics) has of the west.

When a moderately right wing party like the Conservatives (compare them, for example, to the american republicans, and you'll find there much less radical) are routinely described as "right wing wackos", well, it doesn't feel good. I have never once felt that jean chretien or paul martin cared one lick about what I felt/believed/loved. They don't represent the values of the west. They don't represent our ideas. They don't represent us. Examples? They pay lip service to giving our underequipped military even adequate boosts, but they don't. And our boys suffer because of it. They tell us they'll clean up wasteful spending, and then the gun registry/sponsorship scandal comes out. They take our ressources and our money, but insult us (sometimes openly, mostly subtly, in off hand remarks, in the tone of their voices, etc.) Simply put, a majority of ontario think people from the west are un-educated, simple minded, lost souls who are in need of some kind of great liberal hand to comfort them. They speak down to us, whether directly or through the tone of there words or the pithy little insults and jokes they make. Even the tone of your posts reek of a kind of ontario bias where old "Dawgbone" needs to come in and set our little minds right.

So right off the bat, the degenerate way they talk to us and treat us makes us weary of them. And then you get to issues.

We in the west (to varying degrees) believe this: we don't need a government to tell us what we should do with our money. We earned it. We should be able to spend it how we please. The fact that most albertans have to give more than 50% of it away to the government is a shame and travesty. They have no right to take our money from us. And its not like we see the results of the money we give in. Here in America, it takes me one day to get something that would take 6 months to get from a Canadian doctor. If downtown toronto was attacked by Al-Qaeda tommorrow, the canadian army, which is already stretched thin, would be unable to go out and actively capture the people who killed our people. The list of issues goes on (health care, military, taxes, gun registry (yes, we should be able to own as many damn guns as we please because we are responsible with them and law abiding)).

We believe buisnesses/people should be able to trade freely, and become as successful as they want, without being hindered or punished by that success. If you make more than 100,000$, you pay 50% of that to the government. You are considered "rich", when in fact your not, and you have just been punished for making the modicum of money you earned. And buisnesses should have the right to trade, fire, hire, and spend money as they please. Gross and abortive buisness regulations hinder wealth, hinder hinder cash flow, and hinder prosperity for the people. Certainly some basic regulations need to be in place, but after that, buisnesses have the right to do what they please. Why? Because they worked hard to get the wealth they have. Because they are independant, free beings who shouldn't have their company's fortunes determined by someone 3000 miles away looking at a sheet of numbers. Because they have personal freedom, and shouldn't have it taken away.

We believe in choice, freedom, equality, and a government that stays out of the lives of its people as much as possible. I should have the right to pay for a doctor to come to my house if I please. Why? I earned the money I have and should recieve the respect to spend it (legally) how I please. As well, I should have the right to buy out the company next to me. Why? because quite possibly I am better at my craft than they are, and can provide service faster, and help the people more.

On social issues, I think we differ from liberals relatively little. Nobody here wants to abolish health care. We want to change it for the better by giving the people who can afford to the right to buy it (in limited amounts) if they want to. We may not like the idea of abortion, but we certainly aren't going to make it a national crusade. Most conservatives (myself included) have realized that abortion has become engrained in this (and Americas) national culture and that we can only try to change minds on it, not fight tooth and nail for it. Even gay marriage I think the majority of convservatives will find common ground with liberals. I personaly believe in gay marriage (I live in new york for god's sake), but even the conservatives who don't mostly agree that homosexuals should get the same benefits of married couples. Legally we have a lot of commone ground. Every conservative believes in strong education. But we don't believe in stealing from the people to fund it. We believe that the money generated by the laissez-faire economy will do more than enough. I graduated from the public school system of Alberta that the "dreaded" ralph klein has done "so much to degrade". I found good, intelligent teachers who worked no harder than any lawyer, doctor, public offical, etc. Our schools are fine, thank you very much, and the kids who fail out are the kids who don't want to be there. School is what you make of it. Personal initiative to suceed is everything.

The issues go on. Simply put: not only do we see the world differently than the liberal-euro centric view, we are disgusted by there blantant condescension towards us. Take Kyoto for example. Did Jean Chretien even stop, for one second, to have the true "national debate" on the issue. No. He didn't go to Alberta and talk to buisness owners who had to lay off people because of the accord. He didn't address the nation. We didn't have any vote/extensive tour by public officials. No true national discourse. Instead, Chretien shoved it through parliament, ignoring our demands to talk. That is indictive of the liberal mentality. They don't care about us (or if they do, there actions don't show it). So its difficult to care about them.

We are the richest province in Canada. We are the most independant. And we have more ressources than you. Yet we are punished for having these things. Furthremore, we have faith in ourselves and our neighbours. We love our people and our land. We are proud of who we are, which doesn't make us unable to see our flaws or unable to reconsider our positions. However it makes us unwavering when we see something clearly.

Unfortunatley, liberal canada doesn't think that way, and in fact mocks us for doing so. And that's why we have problems.

mamettt is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:14 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.