Canadian Politics Thread

[Rook]

4 hours ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Either that, or just maybe it's because you aren't a selfish jerk.....

This here is it.. 

 

Ive spent my whole adult life getting to the point I would consider myself kinda Wealthy.  But, here’s what makes me a little different.  I’ve got what I need, so I give back double what I take.  Sounds crazy, but I have the means to be that bright spot in a world that seems to be so dark at times.  And although I am a lot more conservative in values than my Mom.. her teachings of kindness to those who need it shined through, living in a society that cares about their neighbour’s, helping them when they are down. Supporting them if needed.  This “utopia” folks get accused of wanting,like it’s a bad thing, is a beautiful. While I don’t have hope for society the way it’s going, I will walk my road hoping if I can make a change in some small way with the people I meet.  If anyone with the means did this, well, who knows.  Prolly be a pretty nice place to live. 

[Ryan Strome]

29 minutes ago, Rook said:

So you post links and it’s credible, but someone else does the same and it’s.. anyone can write anything?  Is there a reason for this?  

I used the CBC.. I think it's fair to say most of you treat it as the gospel. It also quotes the police force. The other link is a partisan website with no proof as to who said what. Also the one MP it mentions they later say her bill never mentioned abortion but I assume most stopped reading by then.

 

Rook called everyone assholes -2002

Must be true, right? 

 

I don't know what to tell you if you can't see the difference.

 

 

22 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

and there's the problem. You would, but PP isn't. In fact he's kind of hypocritical on it. He claims to be personally pro-choice but he lets his backbenchers bring forward anti-choice ideas.

 

People are upset about it because even though its a long-shot idea, it is a possibility that the strategy could work. Get a couple of so-called mother and/or fetus laws passed, bring in a few more social-con leaning SCoC judges and maybe they get their abortion law. Yes its a long-shot and not likely to happen but its theoretically possible, and they have their inspiration with Roe in the US.

 

Its Poilievre's hypocrisy thats bothersome and gives the criticism legs. He won't come out and stop his backbenchers, so he doesn't have any credibility on this topic. 

 

1) it's their right as elected officials and it's also the right of their constituents to say you're history for that.

 

2) "his backbenchers" are elected by their constituents not PP. What kind of parliament do you want? Sounds pretty authoritarian, no?

 

Good quote from a long time ndper who is pro choice.

 

 

David Christopherson is pro-choice and has been an elected New Democrat for three decades. But on Monday night, he simply couldn’t bring himself to vote with the rest of his party on the Canada Summer Jobs attestation, which requires applicants to declare their core mandate respects abortion rights.

“Canadians have a right to disagree with the law, recognizing they will respect it and will honour the law,” he said. “You have the right to say anything you want about a law, and that attestation took that right away. I cannot condone that.”

[Ryan Strome]

29 minutes ago, Satchmo said:

I think there is much more going on in this thread that what you mentioned.   

 

Personally, I don't care what Jack Layton was doing in a massage parlor.  My memory of him is still positive (though I did not want to see him as PM). Alf is Alf and if he didn't supply enough evidence maybe he was distracted by a cat.   Or maybe he thought it was not worth the effort.   This thread can be trying.

 

Facts are important.   So are feelings which often arise from facts seen days, months, years before.    I feel a con government is more likely to impede women's rights than a lib government.   That's how I feel based on what I have seen and read and will ignore any requests for facts to back it up.

 

To me blackface is a maxi burger.   I found that episode despicable.  Still do.

 

Did someone actually say only a lib pm may fire a justice minister?  That incident was sketchy but I don't think sketchy is only the domain of libs.   

 

Yes, this seems to be a predominately left leaning forum.   It is what it is and we are who we are.   The recent poll suggest we are mostly all older fogies and therefore most likely set in our ways.  Know your audience.

 

Breathe.  Type.  Re-read.  Post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You don't need to tell me to breathe brother. None of this stuff gets to me. And while I appreciate you can recognize the prominent left wing that does exist I would also like you if you find the time just to go over it and say jeez he gets attacked just because he isn't left wing. Now don't feel bad for me. I can handle it. I feel like I'm told to provide facts and proof which is very fair and I do and somehow people make excuses for it. Just like the black face they make the excuse that the prime minister never even made himself. But when I asked for proof and facts I get told I'm complicit in the bad behavior yet I don't even know what the bad behavior is cuz I'm not provided the proof. That was told to me from a teacher if you can believe that.

Edited October 6, 2023 by Ryan Strome

[Bob Long]

3 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

I used the CBC.. I think it's fair to say most of you treat it as the gospel. It also quotes the police force. The other link is a partisan website with no proof as to who said what. Also the one MP it mentions they later say her bill never mentioned abortion but I assume most stopped reading by then.

 

Rook called everyone assholes -2002

Must be true, right? 

 

I don't know what to tell you if you can't see the difference.

 

 

1) it's their right as elected officials and it's also the right of their constituents to say you're history for that.

 

2) "his backbenchers" are elected by their constituents not PP. What kind of parliament do you want? Sounds pretty authoritarian, no?

 

Good quote from a long time ndper who is pro choice.

 

 

David Christopherson is pro-choice and has been an elected New Democrat for three decades. But on Monday night, he simply couldn’t bring himself to vote with the rest of his party on the Canada Summer Jobs attestation, which requires applicants to declare their core mandate respects abortion rights.

“Canadians have a right to disagree with the law, recognizing they will respect it and will honour the law,” he said. “You have the right to say anything you want about a law, and that attestation took that right away. I cannot condone that.”

 

So that NDP member is talking about a freedom of expression issue thats part of our laws, thats very different from introducing new law.

 

Parties are authoritarian to some degree on whats allowed to be tabled. Parties have mandates and policies that include and exclude all kinds of things. Do you think PP would put up with one of his backbenchers putting forward something he fundamentally disagreed with? not a chance. PP seems far more tolerant of it than Harper actually, who had less patience with these folks. 

 

PP says he's 'pro choice' but he's also fine if that choice ends up being taken away. If he really care about protecting women's rights he wouldn't support these folks in their attempts. But its too big a part of his base, so he throws them some red meat. 

 

Its the same as this whole fake "parents rights" garbage wedge people like Moe are in love with. 

 

 

 

 

[Ryan Strome]

4 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

So that NDP member is talking about a freedom of expression issue thats part of our laws, thats very different from introducing new law.

 

Parties are authoritarian to some degree on whats allowed to be tabled. Parties have mandates and policies that include and exclude all kinds of things. Do you think PP would put up with one of his backbenchers putting forward something he fundamentally disagreed with? not a chance. PP seems far more tolerant of it than Harper actually, who had less patience with these folks. 

 

PP says he's 'pro choice' but he's also fine if that choice ends up being taken away. If he really care about protecting women's rights he wouldn't support these folks in their attempts. But its too big a part of his base, so he throws them some red meat. 

 

Its the same as this whole fake "parents rights" garbage wedge people like Moe are in love with. 

 

 

 

 

Listen, I'm not saying that your argument is a bad one because if I was the party leader I wouldn't want these people in my party either. That being said though it's not the leader's party and we need to remember that it's the constituents that put these people there. If they are voting for this, who Is Pierre, Justin or Jag to say otherwise, this is how democracy works. The reason I showed you that quote was to show you that he was not going to go along with that. He couldn't support it. The point he was making was is people are allowed to disagree with laws that's called freedom and democracy. So to have a party member that doesn't support something because they are put there by their constituents who are staunchly agree with it You want an authoritarian leader to stop it all? The irony with this is if I go over to other threads, let's say the Trump thread suddenly authoritarianism isn't good, is it?

 

It's difficult to say for sure because I share your view and that we don't want these people in society, but I think that the comment he made was very good in that While we might disagree, it's their right to have that opinion and as it goes for these conservatives or so far actually all I've been showed is one conservative in particular Is that clearly her constituents want this? And if we are only going to let the leader decide on everything then why are we wasting our money on MPs?

Edited October 6, 2023 by Ryan Strome

[BlockerHigh]

26 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

OK. What does that have to do with CBC funding?

You brought it up 

[Bob Long]

Just now, BlockerHigh said:

You brought it up 

 

I was responding to the idea that CBC isn't being critical of the current government. But they do that, all the time. 

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Listen, I'm not saying that your argument is a bad one because if I was the party leader I wouldn't want these people in my party either. That being said, though it's not the leader's party and we need to remember that it's the constituents that put these people there. If they are voting for this, who Is Pierre, Justin or Jag to say otherwise, this is how democracy works. The reason I showed you that quote was to show you that he was not going to go along with that. He couldn't support it. The point he was making was is people are allowed to disagree with laws that's called freedom and democracy.

 

And I agree with him. But that isn't the same thing as making a new law. 

 

2 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

 

So to have a party member that doesn't support something because they are put there by their constituents who are staunchly against it. You want an authoritarian leader to stop it all? The irony with this is if I go over to other threads, let's say the Trump thread suddenly authoritarianism isn't good, is it?

 

Sometimes yes, we need leaders to make hard choices and stop certain things from coming forward, when they effect something as fundamental as a person having free choices over what they do with their health decisions. 

 

Isn't this what the anti-vaxxers are so mad about? believing that they do not have freedom to make their own choices? 

 

2 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

 

It's difficult to say for sure because I share your view and that we don't want these people in society, but I think that the comment he made was very good in that. While we might disagree, it's their right to have that opinion and as it goes for these conservatives or so far actually all I've been showed is one conservative in particular Is that clearly her constituents want this? And if we are only going to let the leader decide on everything then why are we wasting our money on MPs?

 

I fully support their right to have an opinion (like it matters, they have it whether I like it or not) and to say it. 

 

But there's only one reason to bring these wedge issues forward, to ultimately make them laws if you can. So if you really do believe in choice, a leader has to put their foot down and stop this stuff, which they can do.

 

I know these folks well, I still have cousins in Yorkton, SK who almost certainly voted this MP in. I know what they would do if given the chance and they would be unapologetic about taking your (or your daughters) rights away. 

 

[Rook]

3 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

So I'm willing to give you this one person and she's a terrible human being for her never-ending attempts at this, if in fact this is true. I don't even know her to be perfectly honest. I never even heard her name until you guys brought it up. But I don't think her last bill had anything to do with abortion, but I would be okay with throwing her out of the party.

Every single party has racist people in it. You need to do better when calling out racism and not point to political parties. Just call it out for what it is. Racism. Didn't you say you served in the armed forces? Feel free not to share, but I'm curious to know which years? Also, as far as firing people and giving written warnings again, I don't know which year's these were in but I can tell you 25 years ago managers laughed and said let's get him to buy us some smokes..

Nobody deserves to be treated like that!!not sure where this happened. I grew up in a very ethnically/racially diverse area and 25 years ago they would have been run out of the building.  Sorry you went through that. 

[LaBamba]

[Ryan Strome]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

And I agree with him. But that isn't the same thing as making a new law. 

 

 

Sometimes yes, we need leaders to make hard choices and stop certain things from coming forward, when they effect something as fundamental as a person having free choices over what they do with their health decisions. 

 

Isn't this what the anti-vaxxers are so mad about? believing that they do not have freedom to make their own choices? 

 

 

I fully support their right to have an opinion (like it matters, they have it whether I like it or not) and to say it. 

 

But there's only one reason to bring these wedge issues forward, to ultimately make them laws if you can. So if you really do believe in choice, a leader has to put their foot down and stop this stuff, which they can do.

 

I know these folks well, I still have cousins in Yorkton, SK who almost certainly voted this MP in. I know what they would do if given the chance and they would be unapologetic about taking your (or your daughters) rights away. 

 

I'm not an anti-vaxxer but I didn't get a covid shot and nobody forced me to. I mean they tried to do things to make me do it but to be honest, I live a pretty boring life and that was provincial anyways. But where I live they didn't keep him in place that long anyhow. So here I am unvaccinated and have all my freedom. The flying bit was problematic I guess but at the time I wasn't flying. So yeah I'm all good. 

 

How's for the rest of your comment it is a tricky situation because like I said, certainly we don't want these people around us but it is their right to disagree and in fact it's potentially their responsibility given their constituents as you just pointed out. Want them to bring this stuff up. What's the perfect answer to this?

 

I maintain these politicians can say whatever they want, but it's the supreme court of Canada that has a rude awakening for them

[Ryan Strome]

7 minutes ago, Rook said:

Nobody deserves to be treated like that!!not sure where this happened. I grew up in a very ethnically/racially diverse area and 25 years ago they would have been run out of the building.  Sorry you went through that. 

The South Okanagan 

 

By the way, no need to feel sorry for me. It probably made me stronger to be perfectly honest. My life turned out pretty good at least in my opinion. 

Edited October 6, 2023 by Ryan Strome

[Rook]

2 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

He wasn't even the leader of the opposition then was he? 

So did these convoyers have the ability to see the future?

So he wasn’t leader of the opposition, but the fact remains he supported those morons. The slate isn’t wiped clean upon taking leadership  

[Rook]

2 hours ago, Optimist Prime said:

"you don't do yourself any favours with that line of obfuscation' is not a personal attack but since you want to weaponize my position here then I can't be a part of this thread anymore. Good bye. 

Your words are needed my new friend. Your posts are refreshing, filled with knowledge and experience.  We like hearing your stories.  

[Ryan Strome]

2 minutes ago, Rook said:

So he wasn’t leader of the opposition, but the fact remains he supported those morons. The slate isn’t wiped clean upon taking leadership  

It's my understanding that he made it clear he was willing to listen to law abiding protesters. I also never said the slate is wiped clean if there was wrong doing on his part. Be perfectly honest, I'm likely not voting for him or the CPC. I was just pointing out when the OP had said they were courting him that he wasn't even the leader.

[Bob Long]

Just now, Ryan Strome said:

I'm not an anti-vaxxer but I didn't get a covid shot and nobody forced me to. I mean they tried to do things to make me do it but to be honest, I live a pretty boring life and that was provincial anyways. But where I live they didn't keep him in place that long anyhow. So here I am unvaccinated and have all my freedom. The flying bit was problematic I guess but at the time I wasn't flying. So yeah I'm all good. 

 

How's for the rest of your comment it is a tricky situation because like I said, certainly we don't want these people around us but it is their right to disagree and in fact it's potentially their responsibility given their constituents as you just pointed out. Want them to bring this stuff up. What's the perfect answer to this?

 

I maintain these politicians can say whatever they want, but it's the supreme court of Canada that has a rude awakening for them

 

yeah in all likelihood the SC wouldn't hear the case. But like I said, its a faint-hope attempt so they are going to try to do it. PP will pander to his base. Libs/NDP will dine out on outrage and PP's own goal. Rinse. Repeat. 

 

I guess I don't see it quite as difficult a decision. We have a Charter, we have some very entrenched rights. Some folks would see that degraded for their own religious ideas, so yes that stuff has to be put down like a rabid dog even if it means a backbencher gets muffled from time to time. Some things take precedence, imo anyway. 

 

But sometimes this stuff also comes from the left - e.g., trying to double up on protections we already have for their own wedge issues. I don't like those either.

 

As far as the vax stuff goes, I'm happy for you to make that choice and live how you want, just as long as someone doesn't go out of their way to put others in harms way like those weirdo's trying to go into hospitals when they knew they were ill.

 

 

[King Heffy]

Just now, Ryan Strome said:

It's my understanding that he made it clear he was willing to listen to law abiding protesters. I also never said the slate is wiped clean if there was wrong doing on his part. Be perfectly honest, I'm likely not voting for him or the CPC. I was just pointing out when the OP had said they were courting him that he wasn't even the leader.

A manifesto overthrowing the government and occupying a city is not law abiding.  The only people who should be listening to these parasites are judges.  PP should also be charged for aiding and abetting these terrorists.

[Ryan Strome]

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

 

yeah in all likelihood the SC wouldn't hear the case. But like I said, its a faint-hope attempt so they are going to try to do it. PP will pander to his base. Libs/NDP will dine out on outrage and PP's own goal. Rinse. Repeat. 

 

I guess I don't see it quite as difficult a decision. We have a Charter, we have some very entrenched rights. Some folks would see that degraded for their own religious ideas, so yes that stuff has to be put down like a rabid dog even if it means a backbencher gets muffled from time to time. Some things take precedence, imo anyway. 

 

But sometimes this stuff also comes from the left - e.g., trying to double up on protections we already have for their own wedge issues. I don't like those either.

 

As far as the vax stuff goes, I'm happy for you to make that choice and live how you want, just as long as someone doesn't go out of their way to put others in harms way like those weirdo's trying to go into hospitals when they knew they were ill.

 

 

So just to be crystal clear, I have my own shack that nobody else was entering during this time. They left their paperwork in a box outside. Then on my days off I was pretty much just a homebody. That's why when everybody freaked out and said they lost all their freedom. I learned I was a very boring person because life wasn't all that bad for me lol

[Ryan Strome]

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

A manifesto overthrowing the government and occupying a city is not law abiding.  The only people who should be listening to these parasites are judges.  PP should also be charged for aiding and abetting these terrorists.

I'm telling you what I recall him saying not what I'm saying. As an Albertan, these protests took a chunk out of our economy as well because while you guys were focused on Ottawa, it was quite a blockade in Southern Alberta as well.

[King Heffy]

1 minute ago, Ryan Strome said:

I'm telling you what I recall him saying not what I'm saying. As an Albertan, these protests took a chunk out of our economy as well because while you guys were focused on Ottawa, it was quite a blockade in Southern Alberta as well.

And I'm saying he should be saying that to a judge during his sentencing hearing.

[Ryan Strome]

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

And I'm saying he should be saying that to a judge during his sentencing hearing.

Oh I know what you're saying. I just didn't want to be called a Nazi anytime soon so I was making clear of my position if you weren't sure.

[Rook]

13 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

The South Okanagan 

 

By the way, no need to feel sorry for me. It probably made me stronger to be perfectly honest. My life turned out pretty good at least in my opinion. 

Wasn’t feeling sorry for you bud, while I don’t agree with a lot of the stuff on here that you do and say.. you are my neighbor and I’m just pissed off it happened to you.  I really can’t stand that stuff.  More so just saying those people were shitty and you didn’t deserve it. 

[Ryan Strome]

1 minute ago, Rook said:

Wasn’t feeling sorry for you bud, while I don’t agree with a lot of the stuff on here that you do and say.. you are my neighbor and I’m just pissed off it happened to you.  I really can’t stand that stuff.  More so just saying those people were shitty and you didn’t deserve it. 

Yeah I share your sentiment. As much as I disagree with what a lot say, I would actually die fighting for their right to say it.

Edited October 6, 2023 by Ryan Strome

[Bob Long]

4 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

So just to be crystal clear, I have my own shack that nobody else was entering during this time. They left their paperwork in a box outside. Then on my days off I was pretty much just a homebody. That's why when everybody freaked out and said they lost all their freedom. I learned I was a very boring person because life wasn't all that bad for me lol

 

OK so that sounds like you made your choice and were cool with the consequences, and I can respect that. You didn't try to force yourself on someone who didn't want to be exposed to you at work. 

 

For me, bring on the shots. I take them all  but I've been in medtech for 25 years so I have a lot more comfort with the development processes than most.

[Rook]

10 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

It's my understanding that he made it clear he was willing to listen to law abiding protesters. I also never said the slate is wiped clean if there was wrong doing on his part. Be perfectly honest, I'm likely not voting for him or the CPC. I was just pointing out when the OP had said they were courting him that he wasn't even the leader.

I think the writing was on the wall for most of us back then that he would get it.  That’s the problem right now.. millions of people and these are the best we can pull together?  Guess it could be worse. Trumps not Canadian