| Posted by: Toral
- Sustainer [2111201313] Fri, Jun 04, 2004, 14:42
There is a federal (national) election in Canada June 28. It was called almost two weeks ago, but I know from experience how intense and overheated my Canadian politics threads get, and at that time things were very hot and I didn't think the board could take another bloodheating overly passionate topic, or that Guru's servers could take the massively increased level of posting.
Links, comments, and stuff will be posted here. |
| 1 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Fri, Jun 04, 2004, 15:16
|
Background: The Liberal Party is, much as I hate to ackowledge it, the natural governing party of Canada. In 1984 and 1988, Brian Mulroney, a completely fluent Quebecer, won huge majority governments Progressive Conservative based on a firm coalition of 2 groups: 1) the West, which has been basically Conservative ever since the time of the sainted John Diefenbaker in the late 50s; 2) nationalist Quebecois (Quebeckers), who desire more provincial rights for Quebec. Basically, a large majority of French Quebecers regard Quebec as a "nation", entitled to an equal voice with English Canada in all arrangements. (Hence the separatist movement.)
The deciding voice in elections is the province of Ontario, which elects or defeats prime ministers. In American terms, Ontario demographically is rather like Ohio/Pennsylvania/Illinois, with a bit of New York City (Toronto) added.
By (or at least at) the end of Brian Mulroney's term, he was perhaps the most unpopular Prime Minister in the history of Canada. One factor was the GST (Goods and Sales Tax), a 7% tax on all transactions, which was applauded by economists because it was a revenue-neutral substitute for a 10% tax on manufactured goods (applied at the source) which was nonsensical and hurt Canada's exports. There was a larger reason though: the coalition Mulroney created was inherently unstable. It included Quebecois whose allegiance to Canada is not heart-felt or visceral, but purely practical; and western Canadians, ("rednecks"?) who have no use for French or Quebec. The unifying factor was more respect for provincial rights, but in the end, that was not enough.
The province of Quebec has never accepted (in the sense of voluntarily agreeing to) the repatriation of the Canadian Constitution in 1982. Mulroney's attempts to mend these wounds (Meech Lake Accord; constitutional referendum) failed.
So the Progressive Conservative Party, the governing party, blew itself apart in one of the most spectacular self-destructions ever. Quebec: Lucien Bouchard, a friend of Mulroney's since university, declared his constitutional proposald to be a betrayal of Quebec, resigned his Cabinet seat, and formed the Bloc Quebecois, a federal party devoted to Quebec independence. A (great) man named Preston Manning created the Reform Party, originally designed to be purely populist, but always with a conservative bent.
The results of the 1993 election:
Election Results Popular Vote Seats Liberals 41.3% 177 Reform 18.7% 52 Bloc 13.5% 54 PC 16.0% 2 NDP 6.9% 9 Other 3.6% 1
The great Progressive Conservative Party had been reduced to 2 seats in Parliament.
The newly elected Liberal Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, would go on to win 2 majority governments after this; and would maintain, consistently, throughout his leadership, (until the very end, when he started to act weirdly), a very steady stream of the highest personal approval ratings as PM of anyone in Canada.
End Lesson 1
Toral
|
|
| 2 | biliruben
ID: 441182916 Fri, Jun 04, 2004, 15:37
|
Nice.
But what I really want to know is why are the gas stations called Beavers.
|
|
| 3 | Seattle Zen
ID: 53252259 Fri, Jun 04, 2004, 17:31
|
Eager for lesson 2
|
|
| 4 | Seattle Zen
ID: 53252259 Mon, Jun 21, 2004, 21:55
|
What's up, Toral? Your election is right around the corner and is very, very interesting. I want to here more about the four candidates
I want to here the story of Kim Campbell. I have seen footage of her "explosion" but to this day can't believe she resigned over it.
I really like the Decision Canada feature in the Vancouver Sun. Check out the riding by riding breakdown.
Vanocuver - large gay population, 19% Catholic, 22% Prod. 43% no religion. My kind of town!
I want to hear more, get to work!
|
|
| 5 | nerveclinic
ID: 44562121 Mon, Jun 21, 2004, 22:08
|
You guys have elections up in Canada?
I thought you still took orders from the Queen, hell she's on all your money...8-)
|
|
| 6 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Tue, Jun 22, 2004, 08:52
|
Ya, I have been lazy. I finished lesson 2 and then the damn browser froze before I could post it and I lost the whole thing, which frustrated me. And it is turning out to be one of the most interesting elections in Canadian history -- heading towards a result totally unbelievable 6 months ago. I'll have to get to work at it.
|
|
| 7 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Tue, Jun 22, 2004, 09:28
|
A brief lesson 2, because it's not possible to appreciate how strange the events of 2004 have been without it.
Jean Chretien went on to win easy majority government wins in 1997 and 2000. They were easy because the natural opposition party, the Progressive Conservatives, split into two parts. Not formally, but its base split. It is as if the Republican party split into 2 sections (3 in a sense).
One part of the split was the Reform Party, later renamed the Canadian Alliance. It began as a Western populist party, led by Preston Manning. It, first, became regarded as the "home team" in western Canada, which removed the electoral base of the Progressive Conservatives. In ideology it was right-wing populist. The "populist" part of the platform -- anti-government, for referenda to decide issues like abortion and capital punishment -- allowed it to accomplish incredible feats in Western Canada, and in particular to cut the legs right out from under the nominally socialist New Democratic Party in the West. Reform was, for example, able to win poor, anti-establishment ridings like Skeena in northern British Columbia -- ridings which never went Conservative even in the great conservative landslides of 1958 and 1984. The Conservatives were seen as an "establishment" party, while Reform was not, enabling Reform to win ridings that had elected hard left-wing types for decades.
Besides the West, Reform took away the "conservative" part of the Progressive Conservative base in Ontario. All of it -- social conservatives, libertarians, economic conservatives, provincial rights people. The Progressive Conservatives were left with the Canadian equivalent of the "liberal Republicans" and moderate Republicans. Reform and the PCs essentially split the Ontario PC base in two -- leaving neither party strong enough to elect more than a handful of MPs in Ontario. Reform had no appeal whatsoever in Quebec, and very little in Atlantic Canada. All in all, a recipe for the Liberals to govern forever without serious electoral opposition. Folks began to be a little tired of this situation, and efforts began to reunite the Reform and PC parties. But as recently as a year ago, this looked impossible. First, the Reform/PC division left much of the popular base of each party -- the grassroots -- hating the other party more than they hated the Liberals. Grassroots PCers saw Reform as reactionary, social-Conservative, evangelical Christian loonies. Reformers saw PCers as establishment, unprincipled, opportunist, Liberals running under another name.
Oh, the other part of the 3-way split of the Conservative base -- nationalist Quebecois defected en masse to the newly created Bloc Quebecois, a party believing in Quebec separatism, but pledged to defend Quebec's interests in Ottawa "until separatism occurs". The Party was originally constituted to exist for only one election, until the forthcoming Quebec referendum which was to approve of the separation of Quebec from Canada. The referendum lost, but the Bloc decided it liked being a federal party in Ottawa. The pay is decent, you get your picture in the papers a lot....Eventually it adopted all the trappings of a regular federal party, including the adoption of policies about and taking interest in, all Canadian matters including things having nothing to do with Quebec (e.g., Atlantic and B.C. fishery problems).
That brings us up to a year ago. I'll post this now so I don't lose it while opening up some other windows, and then get back and post the results of the last 2 elections, so you can see how the split left the Liberals completely in the catbird seat.
Toral
|
|
| 8 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Tue, Jun 22, 2004, 09:41
|
1997: % Popular vote Lib - 38.5; Reform - 19.4; PC - 18.8; NDP - 11; BQ - 10.7 New House seat configuration: Lib - 155; Reform - 60; BQ - 44; NDP - 21; PC - 20
Notice: the Liberals win a majority with a grand 38.5% of the popular vote. Reform and PC are roughly equal in popular vote. Reform takes 3 times as many seats because of the relative concentration of its vote in Western Canada.
In Ontario, Reform takes 19.1% of the vote, the Progressive Conservatives 18.8% (very similar to their national numbers). The Liberals took 49.5% of the vote in the province -- and 101 of the 103 seats in Ontario.
|
|
| 9 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Tue, Jun 22, 2004, 09:53
|
2000 is more of the same, except that the historic allegiances that have kept many conservative voters voting Progressive Conservative are being seen to collapse.
% Popular vote Lib - 40.8; Canadian Alliance (formerly reform) - 25.5; PC - 12.2; NDP - 8.5; BQ - 10.7 New House seat configuration: Lib - 172; CA - 66; BQ - 38; NDP - 13; PC - 12.
|
|
| 10 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Fri, Jun 25, 2004, 08:40
|
Boy am I terrible and slow at this.
The last 3 things you need to know:
1. Last year, Jean Chretien retired after a sustained campaign in his own party to get rid of him, led by his replacement Paul Martin, the Liberal Leader. Martin was a highly respected finance minister who got the Canadian budget into balance and who was expected to lead the Liberals to even bigger victories than they have enjoyed in the last 3 elections.)
2. The PCs and Reform (Alliance) unexpectedly put aside their differences at the beginning of this year and merged, creating a unified right opposition. Nothing much was expected of them this election. At the beginning of this year, the Liberals were 20 points ahead in the public opinion polls, as they have been for some years. And then....
3. 2 things blew up on the Liberals. The adscam scandal (aka sponsorship scandal) erupted when it was discovered by the Auditor General that hundreds of millions of dollars supposedly meant for national-unity efforts in Quebec had gone to liberal advertising agencies in return for no work. No one knows, even today, where the money went. Some likely went back to the Liberal Party in kickbacks; some went to Liberal cronies. Immense fury resulted, particularly in Quebec. And then the Ontario Liberal government issued its budget earlier this year. Enacted on a balance-the-budget-without-increasing-taxes programme, they instead admitted that they could not fulfil their commitments and produced a deficit budget and -- crucial -- reinstated individual health premiums to be paid up front (in addition to the employer tax which previously had funded medicare). (The premiums kick in, fortuitously for the Liberals, the same week as the election, next week.) Immense fury in Ontario. The approval ratings for the Liberal premier, Dalton McGuinty, have dropped to 9% (nine percent), the lowest approval rating for any approval rating of any Ontario/Canadian political leader I have ever seen. And although the federal Liberal party has no direct connection with this, there happens to be an election, this Monday, in which people can vent their fury on the Liberals if they wish. -------------------------
The result: totally unexpectedly, a collapse in Liberal support, the disappearance of the 20-point lead, leaving the parties relatively even in -popular support. 3 polls out in the last 2 days: Lib 33, Cons 33; Libs 32, Cons 31; Compas Libs 34, Cons 33. (The rest taken up by the NDP, the Bloc, and -- the Greens, which are running at 6% nationally and in double digits in British Columbia, with their having an outside chance of winning their first seat ever there.)
The likely result of this seems to be a Conservative minority government (or possible a Liberal minority government) which would have to depend on the support of the separatist Bloc Quebecois to survive in the Commons. Conservatyives are likely to do better even if only even in popular vote because their vote is spread out better for them -- the Liberals have "wasted votes" because they win ridings in places like English Montreal and ethnic areas in Toronto by massive margins.)
There. Now I can start posting stuff about the campaign itself (or the last 3 days of it, anyway).
Toral
|
|
| |
| 12 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Fri, Jun 25, 2004, 09:13
|
Take a look at the Liberal Party's ads, TV ads, on this page. Did you know that Conservative leader Stephen Harper wants Canada to have (shudder) American-style social services? Harper's support for the war in Iraq is also used against him.
|
|
| 13 | Baldwin
ID: 5544766 Sat, Jun 26, 2004, 03:04
|
I and doubtless many others are reading. We just have so little to add. If I knew a thousandth as much about Canadian politics as you do about USA politics I'd be taking a step forward.
You have my full attention.
I like it a lot better in Britain where it's the liberals who have split their vote and often handed the reins to conservatives.
|
|
| 14 | R9 Leader
ID: 2624472 Sat, Jun 26, 2004, 04:51
|
As a Canadian who's been following the election for a while, I just have to say great recap so far. I'm completely torn over who I want to see win, as I find some of the things I support are strong with the Liberals and weak with the Conservatives, and then vice-versa with other things. My riding will almost assuredly go to the Liberals anyway so my vote is moot, but I'm still unsure of my preference. Could it be that the Bloc Quebecois (even though I'm their nemesis, and English Quebecer!) could actually end up doing good things for me because of their position in the Commons? (If that doesn't drive home what a crazy election this is, I don't know what will.)
Toral's Conservative slant does come threw as a tad anti-Liberal IMHO, but thats ok, its his thread. :)
One final interesting thing I saw, an open letter to the people of Canada from Ralph Nader. I'm not going to comment one way or the other on his letter, but I just found it interesting that an American politician would feel the desire (need?) to comment on our election.
|
|
| |
| 16 | Seattle Zen
ID: 53252259 Mon, Jun 28, 2004, 01:10
|
Excellent piece by Ralph Nader. He speaks for a lot of Americans and nearly all Seattlites when he says:
There are many Americans who, over the decades, have looked to Canada for social justice initiatives to emulate.
Let me second Baldwin, excellent recap Toral. Can't wait for an onslaught of invective when the Liberals win again :)
|
|
| 17 | CanadianHack
ID: 15126179 Mon, Jun 28, 2004, 10:45
|
I'll put this prediction on the record before the polls close tonight:
Liberals 126 seats Conservatives 104 seats Bloc Quebecois 45 seats New Democrats 32 seats Green Party 1 seat
|
|
| 18 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Mon, Jun 28, 2004, 10:50
|
PREDICTION:
Cons 117 Lib 108 Bloc 60 NDP 22 Ind 1
Note: I mentioned 3 polls in post 10. 2 more came out subsequently. All 5 polls showed the 2 parties within 1 point of each other -- never seen anything like that before.
|
|
| 19 | Matt S Donor
ID: 11272519 Mon, Jun 28, 2004, 11:21
|
Man, this is exciting. I've been following everything since January, and its very interesting how things have unfolded. The one thing that has really pissed me off is the amount of people that partake in this "strategic voting" BS. Vote for the party whose values you believe in. That's what democracy is. You're not doing anybody any favours voting for a party that do don't like. Here's my predictions:
Liberals 113 Conservatives 107 NDP 32 Bloc 54 Green 1 Ind 1
I'm off to cast my ballot for my NDP candidate. Matt S
|
|
| 20 | R9 Leader
ID: 2624472 Mon, Jun 28, 2004, 11:22
|
Prediction: What do I get if I win? :)
Liberals 116 seats Conservatives 115 seats Bloc Quebecois 55 seats New Democrats 20 seats Green Party 2 seat
The one extra Liberal seat will be decided by 3 votes in some Ontario riding. After 10 recounts and constant bickering in the Commons, President Bush solves our problem by finally annexing Canada and naming Paul Bremer interim administrator.
|
|
| 21 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Mon, Jun 28, 2004, 11:45
|
'Tis the question of the day whether there has been a shift over the weekend toward "strategic" or "tactical" voting: how many NDP and Green supporters are going to vote Liberal to stop the Tories?
From another perspective on tactical voting: by Globe columnist Christie Blatchford, A would-be tactical voter changes her mind.
|
|
| 22 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Mon, Jun 28, 2004, 22:20
|
It didn't happen for us (the Conservatives). A surprisingly good night for the Liberals, better than even their strategists expected. Ontario seems to have turned against us in the last weekend.
|
|
| 23 | Seattle Zen
ID: 53252259 Tue, Jun 29, 2004, 01:59
|
Happy, happy, joy, joy. Marijuana for everyone! 4% for the Greens, not bad. I love Canada.
Who is Chuck Cadman? Is he the Jim Jefforts of Canada? Took me forever to find out who was the one "Other".
Very interesting to see that Jack Layton barely won his riding.
Look around, Toral. You are now looking at the high water mark for Conservatives in Canada. Let's get this close ever again.
|
|
| 24 | CanadianHack
ID: 15126179 Tue, Jun 29, 2004, 10:42
|
For completion here are the final results (as CBC reports them)
Liberal 135 Conservative 99 Bloc 54 NDP 19 Independant 1
So how did the predictions do?
Easiest way to evaluate is to add up the difference between predicted numbers for a party and actual numbers (ie my predictions) Liberal 126 (missed by 9) Conservative 104 (missed by 5) Bloc 45 (missed by 9) NDP 32 (missed by 13) Green Party 1 (missed by 1) Independant 0 (missed by 1)
I missed by 38 R9 missed by 40. Matt S missed by 42. Toral missed by 54.
So do I declare myself the winner and accept my prize of .... NOTHING?
|
|
| 25 | R9 Leader
ID: 2624472 Tue, Jun 29, 2004, 11:57
|
... and amazingly the Liberal/ND 'alliance' will be 1 seat short of a majority. The Bloc/Conservatives are 2 short. So who's this incredibly important Independant that won?
|
|
| 26 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Tue, Jun 29, 2004, 12:38
|
Chuck Cadman is a Tory who lost the party nomination to a candidate who sold a lot of riding memberships to members of the East Indian community. He'll rejoin the Tory caucus.
He's not really that important because even without him it would take a Bloc/C/NDP combo to defeat the Libs and that won't happen.
Toral
|
|
| 27 | Jazz Dreamers
ID: 135252815 Tue, Jun 29, 2004, 13:36
|
Will the loss of a majority by the Liberal Party and a need to align with the NDP (and/or the Bloc) move them significantly to the left (relative to Canadian politics)?
How long will a coalition government last?
And also, it's interesting that the Liberals, Conservatives, and the Bloc all got more seats under the current system than they would have gotten had the seats been giving out proportionally to each party based on the percentage of the nation-wide votes received. (The Bloc party would have suffered the most under this latter system, which would have diluted their strength in Quebec.) The NDP won significantly less seats under the actual system than they would have under the proportional system.
|
|
| 28 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Tue, Jun 29, 2004, 14:05
|
1. A little bit to the left. Likely areas of concessions: a new tax structure for cities, more health care funding, no cooperation with the U.S. on anti-missile defence. The NDP has said that it will make a referendum on proportional representation a condition of its support; but the Liberals just can't agree to move to a PR system, as it would destroy their ability to run the country with 38-40% of the vote. There is past experience with these types of Lib-NDP arrangements, federally (1972-74), and in Ontario (1985-87). The NDP will get some movement toward their positions, but the Liberals will make it very clear that the tail is not wagging the dog.
2. Likely between 1 and 2 years. At some point the Libs will pick an advantageous time to dissolve Parliament and call an election, hoping for a majority. (Technically, it's not a coalition government; a coaltion government is one in which the partner party gets Cabinet positions and shares responsibility for Government actions and agrees to support them all. The Liberals will seek support primarily from the NDP, but might rely on support from the Bloc or the Conservatives on some issues.)
3. That's why the NDP wants a referndum on proportional representation.
Toral
|
|
| 29 | Matt S Donor
ID: 11272519 Tue, Jun 29, 2004, 14:23
|
Proportional representation will be a must for any NDP support. The fact that 16% of this country is represented by 19 people and another 30% are represented by 99 people tells me that a lot of Canadian voices are not being heard.
The Liberals know that they will lose representation in some parts if they agree to some electoral reform, but their natural enemies (Bloc and Cons) will be hurt far more, and that just might be enough incentive for them to go ahead with it.
It's going to be an interesting autumn in the HOC, however, I don't think much will change. The issues that were most important to me (marijuana legalization, foreign policy, Kyoto, Trade) will likely remain status quo, and I'll spend the next 4 years griping about how nobody is listening. Maybe that's just the pessimist in me talking though. :)
Matt S
|
|
| 30 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Tue, Jun 29, 2004, 14:35
|
My money says the NDP settle for some kind of Royal Commission or parliamentary committee to study proportional representation. Lots of show, hearings all across the country, serious study of alternative frameworks, etc., but nothing that actually gets done before the Grits decide to call an election.
For the Liberals, PR means giving up power voluntarily, and that is against their most sacred of principles.
Toral
|
|
| 31 | Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Tue, Jun 29, 2004, 14:41
|
Fair Vote Canada works for PR and electoral reform.
Notice Paul Martin's comment:"We can learn from what the provinces are doing and then we can make sure that when we proceed there will be no mistakes." Translation: We'll stall this as long as we need to.
Toral
|
|
| 32 | yankeeh8tr
ID: 59513013 Thu, Jul 01, 2004, 08:12
|
Happy Canada Day to all our north of the border friends, eh.
|
|
| 33 | Pancho Villa Sustainer
ID: 533817 Thu, Jul 22, 2004, 10:06
|
Canadian lesbians seek divorce Probably OT for this thread, but it brings into play some interesting complications.
|
|
| 34 | Toral
ID: 14263120 Thu, Apr 21, 2005, 17:16
|
Not much bandwidth taken, so might as well keep this one going for the federal election expected in June.
GROSS ME OUT! Conservative MP Belinda Stronach, who ran for the Conservative Party leadership in 2004 as leader of the Progressive faction and will try again if Conservative leader Stephen Harper loses this election in running around with Bill Clinton AGAIN! I would have thought that she would have figured out that being one of Bill Clinton's mistresses is not something she would really want on her resume at that time.
Toral
|
|
| 35 | Toral
ID: 14263120 Thu, Apr 21, 2005, 17:25
|
Blogging Tories has an RSS Feed of conservative blogs.
Toral
|
|
| 36 | Seattle Zen
ID: 178161719 Thu, Apr 21, 2005, 17:45
|
Hmm, she even looks like Hillary. Knocking boots with Bill isn't such a bad idea, really. It's not like any of the other candidates would dare make the implication and Bill may make a few phone calls from his Friends of Bill Canadian rolodex that could help her out.
|
|
| 37 | sarge33rd
ID: 5733615 Thu, Apr 21, 2005, 19:36
|
the link in 34, takes me to the article, then before I can read 3 lines...it jumps to any one of a variety of pages. Nitemoves Atlanta (porn directory), work at home schemes, etc etc etc. anyone have better luck with it?
|
|
| 38 | Toral
ID: 53422511 Tue, May 17, 2005, 11:21
|
Yay! Happy day! Belinda the wicked witch has defected to the Liberals! She wasn't a Conservative anyway and I'm happy to have her out of my party.
She sells cheap -- all she got was Human Resources Minister.
Toral
|
|
| 39 | Horne_Dawg
ID: 1011111620 Wed, May 18, 2005, 20:16
|
Why are the 2 biggest and useless mounts in Canadian politics from Alberta, and why do people vote them in.
Anne McLellan Edmonton Centre Liberal
Diane Ablonczy Calgary - Nose Hill Conservative
|
|
| 40 | Horne_Dawg
ID: 1011111620 Wed, May 18, 2005, 20:18
|
ops, I can't edited the spelling mistakes.
|
|
| 41 | Matt S
ID: 13450122 Thu, May 19, 2005, 00:40
|
I have never heard anything but trash spewed from Ablonczy's mouth. It seems like everthing she says is taken from a Conservative Party mail-out. I end up laughing every time she opens her mouth in the HOC.
|
|
| 42 | Matt S
ID: 55381912 Thu, May 19, 2005, 14:54
|
Anyone else notice the way Belinda was looking at Scott Brison in the HOC today? Alterior motive?
I heart Bill Graham's facial gymnastics!
|
|
| 43 | Horne_Dawg
ID: 1011111620 Thu, May 19, 2005, 15:37
|
no, but I love the way Scott Brison, shot back at the old hag, Ablonczy.
|
|
| 44 | Toral
ID: 53422511 Thu, May 19, 2005, 16:23
|
A fine column by Coyne on the Belinda defection:Belinda, you do not know the people you are dealing with. You think your soul is black but you have no idea. You will hold your office for a couple of days, or perhaps a few months, but only for as long as you are useful to them. And then they will discard you. About the vote tonight -- the Liberals have the votes to win. Main interest in the proceedings is the rumours going round that the Liberals not *want* an election, buoyed a latest polls, and might contrive some way of defeating themselves!
Toral
|
|
| 45 | Horne_Dawg
ID: 1011111620 Thu, May 19, 2005, 16:47
|
Toral; I think you gave us the wrong link. I dont know if the Lib have the vote locked up. Its up to Chuck Cadman. He has all the power tonight.
|
|
| 46 | Toral
ID: 53422511 Thu, May 19, 2005, 16:51
|
Doh. Thanx Horne-dawg. Try this one.
|
|
| 47 | Horne_Dawg
ID: 1011111620 Thu, May 19, 2005, 17:06
|
Coyne, also bad mouthed her last night on the Hour. I actually like Coyne, our right winged reporters used facts and are a lot more respectable then the ones in the USA ( Coulter).
|
|
| 48 | Matt S
ID: 55381912 Thu, May 19, 2005, 18:17
|
Cadman votes for the government. The Liberals survive to see another day.
|
|
| 49 | Toral
ID: 53422511 Tue, Jun 07, 2005, 08:35
|
Liberal MP Quits Party over Gay Marriage
The Grits have enough support to pass the gay marriage bill, with the separatists and NDP supporting them.
Just a handful of Liberals voting to to the budget could bring down the government and derail the bill. But the Conservatives, bruised a bit over public reaction to their last nonconfidence try, don't want an election now.
Toral
|
|
| 50 | Matt S
ID: 5658523 Tue, Jun 14, 2005, 00:21
|
The Conservatives are bruised by more than that, Toral. It has come out that the Grewal tapes given to the press and posted on the web, had been altered to leave out critical parts of conversations.
To add to that, there is footage of Grewal in the the Vancouver airport trying to give passengers an "urgent package" to take to Ottawa. All of this controversy surrounding Grewal has forced him to go on stress leave.
And now recent polls I have seen have the Conservatives even, or falling behind the NDP in popular support, and Liberal support way up from just a month ago. Grits 37%, Tories 22%, NDP 21%.
How soon before more progressive defections in Conservative caucus?
Matt S
|
|
| 51 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Fri, Nov 25, 2005, 17:02
|
OK, looks like we're ready to go with another Festival of Dullness. Liberal Government to be defeated Monday; Election in January
Sponsorship scandal whistleblower Allan Cutler will run for the Tories: The Tories, meanwhile, unveiled a candidate they hope will stand as a powerful symbol in the campaign: Allan Cutler, the retired bureaucrat who first tried to alert his superiors to mismanagement in the federal advertising branch responsible for the sponsorship scandal.
Cutler announced he has decided to run for the Tory nomination in Ottawa South, a riding that's home to many civil servants, but that incumbent Liberal MP David McGuinty — Premier Dalton McGuinty's younger brother — won by a comfortable 5,300 votes in 2004.
Cutler was greeted by a raucous ovation when introduced at the party's weekly caucus meeting.
"I'm not used to this, I'm not used to having supporters," said Cutler, who was removed from his job for trying to stand in the way of the program in the early 1990s. "I spent my life, 30 years, quietly doing my job. When the sponsorship issue came up, I did what every public servant should do, and should do without fear of reprisal. I have to tell you I don't believe I did anything remarkable, I did what should be done." In other news, Pre-writ mudslinging warm-up. Toral
|
|
| 52 | Matt S in Vietnam
ID: 361010275 Sun, Nov 27, 2005, 06:29
|
The only reason this is happening is because the NDP want it to. The Conservatives stand to gain nothing in this next election, but don't want to appear weak by not calling for the death of the Liberals when they have the chance. The electorate has already punished the Liberals for the sponsorship scandal, by giving them a minority in 2004. We knew about it then, and nothing has changed since. The first 'official report' by Gomery told us very little we didn't already know or was assuming.
Regardless, Canadians are not worried by even a Conservative minority (the best case scenario for them.) With the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc opposing their point of view in literally every facet of government management, it wouldn't last a week before we were headed to the polls again.
The Liberals will not lose many - if any seats. They may even gain. Outside of Alberta and parts of BC, the people of Canada see the Conservatives as a joke. They present no platform, and run only on slandering their opposition. Stephen Harper is not fit to run a country, let alone his own party, that is in itself still split down the middle with progressives and reformers.
If the NDP can gain some seats without taking them from the Liberals, they will have the balance of power. They will form a coalition government with the Grits, and the Conservatives will be left to wallow in their defeat.
And finally, work will get done in the HoC.
Matt S
|
|
| 53 | R9 Leader
ID: 02624472 Sun, Nov 27, 2005, 07:53
|
I agree completely. Harper is probably the #1 reason why the Conservatives don't have a chance. There's plenty of people out here unwilling to vote for the Liberals (still) after the sponsorship scandal. In the last vote some of those voted NDP or Bloc, but most voted Conservative. These days it seems the NDP will get alot of those former C votes, as alot of would-be Conservative voters don't trust Harper. They want an alternative to the Liberals, it just isn't the Tories.
I don't see the Liberals losing too many votes. At the very least, any votes they lose will be matched by Torie losses. Its not hard to imagine the NDP being the big winners here, which isn't all that surprising since they're the ones letting this all happen in the first place...
|
|
| 54 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Sun, Nov 27, 2005, 09:19
|
nodice.ca is a good source for polls and other election info.
The latest 3 polls are consistent with anything from a slim Conservative minority to a Liberal majority. The only thing consistent about them is that Matt S.'s NDP, who had been doing well a few weeks ago, seem to be sinking back into the swamp -- the 3 show them at 17, 16, and 16.
Toral
|
|
| 55 | R9 Leader
ID: 02624472 Sun, Nov 27, 2005, 22:49
|
While everyone knows the shortcomings of polls, its worth pointing out again. That site has the Bloc losing almost 33% of their votes, with most going to the liberals, in one day... when nothing of interest has been said by either party. Obviously a factor of survey +/-, which seems to be pretty big.
|
|
| 56 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Thu, Dec 01, 2005, 19:28
|
Things looking up for the Tories! Layton, NDP say Stephen Harper is not evil or scary, just wrong.In the waning days of the 2004 campaign a key Liberal strategy was to target soft NDP support and to drive it toward them by painting Harper and the Conservatives as socially extreme.
The resulting vote split frustrated the NDP and party strategists estimate it cost them at least 13 close riding battles.
"The Liberals came in with a pile of crap in the last week of the campaign and tried to frighten voters and it worked in some places," grumbled former NDP leader Ed Broadbent, who joined Layton on the stump in Oshawa, his former riding and hometown..... "In addition, Broadbent said, the Conservatives have mellowed in the intervening 17 months.
"They're doing everything to appear as a moderate party and Mr. Harper has been around a little longer," he said.
"Perhaps he'll be more congenial and and a little less scary personally."
|
|
| 57 | Matt S in Thailand
ID: 401148135 Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 07:01
|
http://www.catoinstitute.com/pub_display.php?pub_id=5237
Why does President Bush hope Christmas comes a little late this year? Because on Jan. 23, Canada may elect the most pro-American leader in the Western world. Free-market economist Stephen Harper, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, is pro-free trade, pro-Iraq war, anti-Kyoto, and socially conservative. Move over Tony Blair: If elected, Mr. Harper will quickly become Mr. Bush's new best friend internationally and the poster boy for his ideal foreign leader.
Well, this is what you guys think. As much as he trys to moderate his image, what he really stands for is not something that can be hidden from Canadians. And anyone having anything to do with the Bush administration is going to get crucified on voting day.
Recent polls look very much like they did at the 2004 election, however, it looks like it will be a further reduced minority, as some key ridings will be lost to the Bloq (in Quebec), to the Conservatives (in Southern Ontario) and to the NDP (in BC). Polling numbers could change, however, as we get closer to voting day. The Liberals haven't started to get nasty yet in their campainging. They're waiting until the last week before the election to do that again.
Matt S
|
|
| 58 | PV in Canada
ID: 1811372017 Tue, Dec 20, 2005, 18:42
|
I really have nothing to report on the election, but the skiing is wonderful at Sun Peaks, BC.
|
|
| 59 | Myboyjack Dude
ID: 014826271 Tue, Dec 20, 2005, 19:44
|
green with envy i am
|
|
| 60 | biliruben Leader
ID: 589301110 Tue, Dec 20, 2005, 19:53
|
I've been meaning to get deep into BC (I've been to Whistler/blackcomb as well Red Mountain, just over the border) either in summer (probably Banff) or winter for a ski vacation for a while now. I expect a full report.
|
|
| 61 | Myboyjack Dude
ID: 014826271 Tue, Dec 20, 2005, 19:56
|
How can you live in Seattle and not have done so?
I'm supposed to be in BC next September for some kind of tag team race/ride my wife has talked me (ordered me) to be her partner in.
|
|
| 62 | biliruben Leader
ID: 589301110 Tue, Dec 20, 2005, 20:01
|
Don't forget your passport!
My only excuse is that my wife likes sunny beach vacations. When I drag her to the mountains it's usually Idaho to see my Dad.
What I really want to do is treat him to a rustic resort fishing vacation for his 75th bday, so I'm looking deep in BC for ideas.
|
|
| 63 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Mon, Jan 02, 2006, 19:23
|
Conservatives now essentially even in national polls.
Because of Quebec, the Conservatives will win more seats in the Liberals if they are even in the national vote. That is, if the parties are even, the Conservatives are ahead by 4 or 5 points outside of Quebec, and their plurality outside Quebec will exceed the number of seats the Liberals win in Quebec.
Guuess it's time for Stephen Harper to make sure he has a good morning coat for when he's called to visit the Queen (or her representative).
Toral
|
|
| |
| 65 | Twarpy
ID: 456482119 Fri, Jan 06, 2006, 00:42
|
They had the lead in the last election too Toral, this is usually the time where people figure out that the Cons are in the lead and do everything in their power to stop them. Will be interesting to see if the trend continues.
|
|
| |
| 67 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Tue, Jan 10, 2006, 08:40
|
Toronto Red Star: Tories Head for Majority Conservatives are charting a course toward a majority on Jan. 23, according to a new national poll completed yesterday.
The survey, conducted by EKOS Research Associates for the Toronto Star and La Presse, shows Stephen Harper's Conservatives have sailed into majority government territory after a stunning week of rising popularity, largely at the expense of the Liberal party.
The EKOS survey of 1,240 Canadians through the weekend and yesterday found 39.1 per cent support for the Conservatives. The Liberals had 26.8 per cent support; the NDP 16.2 per cent; the Bloc Québécois 12.6 per cent; and Green party 4.6 per cent.
"This is the breakthrough Harper has been waiting for," EKOS president Frank Graves said.
In Ontario, the Conservatives have widened the gap to a 10-percentage-point lead over the Liberals. Of the 518 Ontarians surveyed, 43.8 per cent supported the Tories, 33.5 per cent the Liberals, 16.2 per cent the NDP, and 5.4 per cent the Greens.
Even in Quebec, the Conservatives are ahead of the Liberals. A total of 330 people were surveyed in that province and 19.1 per cent threw their support behind the Tories, compared with 17.4 per cent for the Liberals.
The Bloc, however, remains miles ahead with 52.4 per cent.
"The Conservatives' gains are nationwide, but their most significant growth is in Ontario, where they have surpassed the Liberals in their traditional heartland, and in Quebec, where they are now the leading federalist alternative to the Bloc Québécois," Graves said.
The national poll numbers are considered accurate within 2.8 percentage points 19 times out of 20. The margin of error in Ontario was 4.3 percentage points.
EKOS's Paul Adams said Harper's popularity is driving the surge. When those surveyed were asked who had the most positive vision for the future, the Conservative leader received 32 per cent support. Prime Minister Paul Martin had 20 per cent, the NDP's Jack Layton 16 per cent, and Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe 10 per cent. "None of the above" registered 10 per cent and 12 per cent said they didn't know.
|
|
| 68 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Tue, Jan 10, 2006, 09:04
|
The first Conservative ads in this campaign stunk but they've been getting better. The latest is somewhat cool IMO. Called "Culture of Entitlement", you can see it here. Click on "ENTITLEMENTS" on the left hand side of the page.
|
|
| 69 | R9 Leader
ID: 02624472 Tue, Jan 10, 2006, 19:02
|
How depressing. What a step backwards a Conservative majority would be.
|
|
| 70 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Wed, Jan 11, 2006, 02:04
|
A key moment, perhaps the last key moment of the campaign, has arrived.
First some background on the English debate. The two polls I've seen on it put Harper on top by 3 points and 1 point. However one of those polls, a big one (2,000), had asked people beforehand who they expected to win the debate. Harper had been favoured over Martin by 13 points. (How Martin got to the point where he trailed Harper by 13 points on that question is unknown, and amazing to me.) But on the question of who won, Harper's lead was only 3. A comparison of pre-debate and post-debate voting intentions (same group of people) showed a 4 point gain for Martin.
So the debate may be viewed as a draw, but a draw that stopped the Conservatives' momentum. That momentum had reached its natural ceiling anyway, at least in Ontario. I mean they've picked up 20 points in the campaign already and now lead by 10. They're not going to keep rising and win the province by 20 or 30; just not gonna happen. There is room for Conservative growth in Quebec and Atlantic Canada. In Atlantica the Tories have caught the Liberals, but could conceivably keep moving up.
So now the crucial point of the campaign. The Liberals today released 12 hard-hitting ads, totally brutal and harsh attacks on Harper. You can see them all at the video section, right side of the page here. Those on the left of centre should watch them; you'll really enjoy them. They are deinitely the type of ads that catch your attention. One of the ads has already been pulled befor airing (see link). It suggested that Harper would have armed soldiers patrolling city streets, like he was General Pinochet or something. (Some message board commentary about this ad.)
So this is it. There are 3 possibilities.
(1) The ads might raise doubts about Harper and his numbers might start to slide, perhaps toward an even split of voters between the parties. (I can't see the Grits doing better than that now).
(2) Or the ads might seem dirty and desperate, and the Liberal campaign might totally implode, like the Kim Campbell Conservative campaign in 1993. Some of the indicia of implosion are already there. Liberal MPs distancing themselves from the national campaign and denouncing it, major strategists being caught in gaffes and fighting with each other, the Leader starting to say weird desperate things, like his out-of-nowhere suggestion Monday night to repeal the notwithstanding clause in Canada's Constitution.)
(3) Or the two above tendencies could counteract each other and nothing might happen in the polls.
I don't know what will happen; that's why this is a crucial moment. If I'd have to guess, I'd guess for the Tories to start slipping a bit, back to the margin between majority and strong minority government.
It will be an exciting 12 days to E-day.
Toral
|
|
| 71 | biliruben
ID: 531202411 Wed, Jan 11, 2006, 08:41
|
Thanks for the update, Toral.
|
|
| 72 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Fri, Jan 13, 2006, 10:29
|
|
|
| 73 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Sun, Jan 15, 2006, 23:12
|
Just reported: CTV/Globe and Mail poll. Conservatives at their largest lead of the campaign:
C 40 L 27 NDP 16 BLOC 11 GRN 6
My "implosion" hypothesis above seems maybe more likely.
On a personal observation thing, have talked with a number of lifelong Liberals in recent week who are just not voting.
Toral
|
|
| 74 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Sun, Jan 15, 2006, 23:36
|
Ouch. I referred above to the ad the Liberals had to withdraw, one that has offended the military, not to mention all fair minded people. Which has become a symbol for the whole negative Grit ad package.
New Conservative ad.
Toral
|
|
| 75 | Toral
ID: 541029611 Sun, Jan 15, 2006, 23:44
|
Aboriginal people endorse Conservatives.
This is not something you see every day, or maybe ever: Congress of Aboriginal Peoples endorses Conservative Party
OTTAWA - Conservative Indian and Northern Affairs Critic Jim Prentice today welcomed the support of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples.
Congress National Chief Dwight Dorey and National Vice-Chief Patrick Brazeau today endorsed the party after meeting with Prentice to discuss the Conservative Party's policies on Aboriginal affairs. The Congress represents Aboriginal peoples living in urban, rural, and remote areas throughout Canada.
"After 12 years, the lives of Aboriginal peoples have not improved," Prentice said. "A Conservative government would do better, and we will work closely with groups such as the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples to achieve the goals outlined in the Kelowna agreement."
The party's election platform, Stand up for Canada, includes a plan which respects Aboriginal people and provides opportunities for them. A Conservative government will also work with groups to develop a northern vision to guide economic, social, and environmental progress in the region.
"The Conservative Party is the only party with a plan to help Aboriginal Canadians," said Mr. Dorey. "Their plans provide real choice and provide real opportunities, and I am encouraged by their policies."
"Stephen Harper has opened the door for the Congress and other groups to work together to improve the lives of Aboriginals," Mr. Brazeau said.
|
|
| 76 | CanadianHack
ID: 70471020 Sun, Jan 22, 2006, 15:20
|
As the person who came closest in predictions for the last election, I will give my predicition for this one:
Conservative 114 Liberal 106 Bloc Quebecois 59 NDP 27 Independant 2
|
|
| 77 | Toral in Ottawa
ID: 540202017 Sun, Jan 22, 2006, 18:19
|
CH's prediction would produce an interesting result as it's quite possible that Paul Martin would stay on and attempt to form a government with such a result.
I'm fighting for computer access here and will have predictions out eventually. At least one last poll to come out, at 8 P.M. on the Globe and Mail website.
|
|
| 78 | Perm Dude Dude
ID: 030792616 Sun, Jan 22, 2006, 22:25
|
Shouldn't you now go by the handle Ottal?
|
|
| 79 | Toral in Ottawa
ID: 540202017 Mon, Jan 23, 2006, 10:48
|
Conservative 138 Liberal 75 Bloc Quebecois 60 NDP 34 Independent 1
Stand Up for Change. Stand Up for Canada.
|
|
| 80 | Dec
ID: 200262011 Mon, Jan 23, 2006, 15:41
|
Conservative 145 Bloc Quebecois 63 NDP 54 Liberal 43 Others 3
Let's go for winning conditions to get to hell out of this country.
|
|
| 81 | CrazyClowns
ID: 5195166 Mon, Jan 23, 2006, 16:39
|
PC 127 PLC 92 BLOC 60 NDP 28 OTHER 1
A lot of potential conservatives voters in Ontario will see images of Harper with little horns on his head when comes the crucial moment and shift to PLC.
NDP support will not falter at the last minute like the last time.
Bloc will be weaker than in 2004, but will get more seats.
|
|
| 82 | Twarpy
ID: 25255819 Mon, Jan 23, 2006, 17:48
|
Cons 129 Libs 73 Bloc 57 NDP 48 IDP 1
|
|
| 83 | biliruben Leader
ID: 589301110 Mon, Jan 23, 2006, 17:56
|
Tories: 130 Liberals: 82 Bloc: 57 NDP: 35 Indy: 1
|
|
| 84 | Matt S in Australia
ID: 240462319 Mon, Jan 23, 2006, 20:58
|
Tories: 124 Grits: 83 NDP: 42 Bloc: 59 Ind: 1
I am hoping and praying the Libs and NDP can form a coalition. Either way a Conservative minority will be toppled in less than a year on votes of no confidence.
Matt S
|
|
| 85 | R9 Leader
ID: 02624472 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 01:06
|
Well that turned out better then expected for the Libs. The Libs and NDP have greater combined numbers then the Tories, so it looks like another year (or 2-3 years) of not much being done on any contentious issue. Martin steps down as Liberal leader, anyone venture a guess for his replacement?
Canadian Hack and Crazyclowns came the closest with their predictions.
|
|
| 86 | Toral in Ottawa
ID: 540202017 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 01:42
|
The Libs and NDP have greater combined numbers then the Tories, so it looks like another year (or 2-3 years) of not much being done on any contentious issue.
I think you misunderstand the Tories, and don't understand Stephen Harper.
The surprise of the upcoming year will be that the Tories and the NDP find a great many things to work on together.
Toral
|
|
| 87 | R9 Leader
ID: 02624472 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 02:06
|
I partially agree. Canadians are undoubtedly getting sick of minority governments not getting anything done, and Layton said as much in his post-election speech. He's going to try to work with Harper on important things that need to get done.
But on issues like gay rights, medicare and marijuana legalization... issues where they are on opposite ends of the spectrum, I don't expect much headway. I.E contentious issues.
|
|
| 88 | Toral in Ottawa
ID: 540202017 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 02:47
|
You make no sense.
Weed decriminalization was not stopped by the Conservatives. The Libs + Bloc + NDP were for it. Mr. Martin lacked political will. The Conservatives would not have stopped it. The Liberals's own caucus stopped them from going forward.
On "medicare" -- describe for me the Conservatives' position on medicare that offends you. We know that Mr. Martin goes to a private clinic for his own health care.
Toral
|
|
| 89 | R9 Leader
ID: 02624472 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 03:53
|
I'm interested to know why you think something in the Conservative medicare position offends me. I'm looking at it in an objective view, thats all.
Fact #1: The NDP's platform calls for a big infusion of cash into the medicare program, and a halting of the privatization we've been seeing more of lately.
Fact #2: The Conservative platform calls for some money to be used to improve wait times at ER's, but not much else beyond that. They have also traditionally been supporters of more privatization and smaller government.
Do I have a choice of which one I prefer? Not really the point. These two views are pretty far appart on the spectrum, so I don't expect much agreement between these two parties on the isssue of healthcare. Thats it. Weather one is better then the other, frankly I'm not educated enough to decide. I just know they disagree on the ideology here, so an agreement between them here seems a bit unlikely.
Mr. Martin goes to a private clinic. I see. Am I supposed to make fun of Harper's hair now?
|
|
| 90 | Toral in Ottawa
ID: 540202017 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 04:06
|
The NDP's platform calls for a big infusion of cash into the medicare program
The NDP's platform calls for a big infusion of cash into everything. That is the NDP's default solution to everything : "a big infusion of cash". Not their own personal cash. Public monies.
Toral
|
|
| 91 | Toral in Ottawa
ID: 540202017 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 05:34
|
R9: Mr. Martin goes to a private clinic. I see. Am I supposed to make fun of Harper's hair now?
As you know, Mr. Martin professes to believe that the existence of private clinics is contrary to our health equality.
He himself went to one, not just for a special problem, but all the time.
Toral
|
|
| 92 | R9 Leader
ID: 02624472 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 05:54
|
The NDP's platform calls for a big infusion of cash into everything. That is the NDP's default solution to everything : "a big infusion of cash". Not their own personal cash. Public monies.
Agreed, if a bit criptic. They are definitely for a big government. So is it no longer silly to assume the Tories and NDP will have problems seeing eye-to-eye on healthcare?
I think all of Canada is aware that Martin went to a private clinic. ;) What that has to do with the NDP and Tories' view on healthcare is still eluding me however. I guess you were just taking a jab at Martin for the heck of it, but give the guy a break... he's had alot of that the last 8 weeks. ;)
|
|
| 93 | CanadianHack
ID: 70471020 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 09:12
|
Results are:
Conservative 124 Liberal 103 Bloc Quebecois 51 NDP 29 Independent 1
If we use the same metric as last time (the difference between predicted results and actualt results);
CH Conservative 114 (10 off) Liberal 106 (3 off) BQ 59 (8 off) NDP 27 (2 off) Independent 2 (1 off) Total predictions off by 24
CrazyClowns also missed by 24
Biliruben missed by 39
Matt S missed by 41
Toral missed by 56
Twarpy missed by 60
Dec missed by 119
My title is defended, but this time I share it with CrazyClowns.
|
|
| 94 | Toral in Ottawa
ID: 540202017 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 09:21
|
At least I didn't finish last this time.
|
|
| 95 | Toral in Ottawa
ID: 540202017 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 09:45
|
But if we assess the CH prediction, under it Mr. Martin would have tried to form a government.
In the event, the result was such that Mr Martin conceded the election and announced that he would not lead the Liberal Party in a future election.
So Canadian Hack was as far off as it is possible to be.
That's what happens to Liberal hacks who are interested only in trying to split the middle.
Toral
|
|
| 96 | Matt S in Australia
ID: 240462319 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 10:05
|
Well, I must say that a Conservative minority is going to be quite interesting. We know that the Conservative stance on major issues such as Kyoto, Star Wars, Private Health Care, Softwood Lumber, Tax Cuts to the poor, Voting Reform, Education, Abortion, Gay rights, Cannabis Law Reform, Repaying National Debt, etc, etc, etc are quite different from the vast majority of Canadian's views. How long can that continue?
Predictions on the new Liberal leader. We know Belinda Stronach wants it. I would say Ralph Goodale would be the other leading candidate. I can't think of anyone outside of the HoC that would be able to do it. It should be an interesting leadership race.
Matt S
|
|
| 97 | CanadianHack
ID: 70471020 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 10:10
|
And if we play CalvinBall and make up the rules as we go along we can claim anybody wins or loses.
And then follow it with an incohenrent rant.
|
|
| 98 | Twarpy
ID: 56056913 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 10:33
|
Toral what did you fly down to Ottawa to finally celebrate a victory you didn't think you would see again in your lifetime?
Congrats to Stephen, I'm just glad we get to testdrive this new car before we realize that it's just the same crap under the hood with a different body.
|
|
| 99 | Catfish Leader
ID: 035262811 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 11:29
|
For all the whining PC westerners have done over the years about being left out, they have to thank Quebecers for 10 of the new seats the PCs won.
Meanwhile, the three biggest cities - Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto - elect no PC members (if I recall).
Politics amuses me most of the time (except when practiced by Mike Harris) and this has certainly been an interesting set of results.
|
|
| 100 | biliruben Leader
ID: 589301110 Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 15:02
|
Third to hacks and clowns! I can accept that.
My main fault was not wanting to jinx the liberals with over-optimism.
|
|
| 101 | Toral in Ottawa
ID: 540202017 Wed, Jan 25, 2006, 12:21
|
I would expect the new government to concentrate on those elements of its platform it can expect to get through easily initially. The Accountability Act (which actually makes a number of significant changes to the way things work), GST reduction and the other tax breaks (e.g. to transit pass buyers) promised, anti-crime measures, etc. That should get them through one session, and then they will see how things look when the smoke clears.
Most of the expected "controversial issue" problems in 96 will not come up. The Conservative position on abortion for the last 2 elections, for example, has been to make no change in the law. The conservatives have promised to hold a free vote on same-sex marriage, but any proposal to change the Liberal-enacted law wouldn't pass anyway so they may just defer the matter. The Government needn't attract adverse attention by withdrawing from Kyoto. The past government wasn't planning to actually adhere to its standards anyway, so the Government can concentrate if it wants on improving that situation a bit rather than the symbolic gesture of withdrawing. Did you know that the United States, despite its non-adherence, is actually closer to Kyoto compliance than Canada? Maybe we can concentrate on bringing our environmental performance up to U. S. standards.
Toral what did you fly down to Ottawa to finally celebrate a victory you didn't think you would see again in your lifetime
Well sort of. I think the party has one or two victories left for it in my lifetime, maybe 20 years from now and 40 years from now.... It's nice to enjoy this one for now, though. Looked like it might never come. I still recall Seattle Zen comparing the perty to the Washington Generals....
|
|
| 102 | Seattle Zen
ID: 91152620 Wed, Jan 25, 2006, 20:59
|
And the analogy was apt. Once the PRI was voted out in Mexico, the Liberals were the last one party rulers in the Americas.
If the Conservatives act as wisely as Toral has proposed in post 101, it would serve them well. I know Harper campaigned on regularly scheduled elections, something I would hope the Canadians would reject as a horrible, American idea.
|
|
| 103 | Myboyjack
ID: 27651610 Wed, Feb 01, 2006, 12:00
|
Mark Steyn feels like crowing a bit
--Remember the conventional wisdom of 2004? Back then, you'll recall, it was the many members of George Bush's "unilateral" coalition who were supposed to be in trouble, not least the three doughty warriors of the Anglosphere--the president, Tony Blair and John Howard--who would all be paying a terrible electoral price for lying their way into war in Iraq. The Democrats' position was that Mr. Bush's rinky-dink nickel-and-dime allies didn't count: The president has "alienated almost everyone," said Jimmy Carter, "and now we have just a handful of little tiny countries supposedly helping us in Iraq." (That would be Britain, Australia, Poland, Japan . . .) Instead of those nobodies, John Kerry pledged that, under his leadership, "America will rejoin the community of nations"--by which he meant Jacques Chirac, Gerhard Schroeder, the Belgian guy . . .
Two years on, Messrs. Bush, Blair, Howard and Koizumi are all re-elected, while Mr. Chirac is the lamest of lame ducks, and his ingrate citizenry has tossed out his big legacy, the European Constitution; Mr. Schroeder's government was defeated and he's now shilling for Russia's state-owned Gazprom ("It's all about Gaz!"); and the latest member of the coalition of the unwilling to hit the skids is Canada's Liberal Party, which fell from office on Monday. John Kerry may have wanted to "rejoin the community of nations." Instead, "the community of nations" has joined John Kerry, windsurfing off Nantucket in electric-yellow buttock-hugging Lycra, or whatever he's doing these days.
It would be a stretch to argue that Mr. Chirac, Mr. Schroeder and now Paul Martin in Ottawa ran into trouble because of their anti-Americanism. Au contraire, cheap demonization of the Great Satan is almost as popular in the streets of Toronto as in the streets of Islamabad. But these days anti-Americanism is the first refuge of the scoundrel, and it's usually a reliable indicator that you're not up to the challenges of the modern world or of your own country. In the final two weeks of the Canadian election, Mr. Martin's Liberals unleashed a barrage of anti-Conservative attack ads whose ferocity was matched only by their stupidity: They warned that Stephen Harper, the Conservatives' leader, would be "George Bush's new best friend"! They dug up damaging quotes from a shocking 1997 speech in which he'd praised America as "a light and inspiration"! Another week and they'd have had pictures from that summer in the late '80s he spent as Dick Cheney's pool boy.
|
|
| 104 | biliruben
ID: 531202411 Wed, Feb 01, 2006, 12:50
|
I read that yesterday. Liberals brought down my scandals as evidence for a victory for all things Bush. He makes the track for his victory lap quite twisty, and through many a swamp.
|
|
| |
| 106 | Catfish Leader
ID: 035262811 Sun, Feb 12, 2006, 18:29
|
# 103 -- What sank Martin was Martin himself -- mostly his inability to identify significant voter issues, come up with policy, and make decisions. Although he had been an excellent finance minister, he did not show the strength to be PM. He and his campaign staff ran a dreadful campaign with a whole lot of tv ads even sillier than the ones myboyjack mentions.
Beyond Martin himself: The funding scandal was a huge select-out for lots of previous Liberal voters; even though Martin himself was exonerated by the judge who presided in the investigation.
But his anti-Americanism? Pretty low down the list. Canadian sentiment towards the invasion of sovereign foreign nations by the US and its pals hasn't shifted since Bush sent you out there after virtual WMDs. If anything Canadians in general feel a huge sense of continuing relief that we were kept out of it by the previous PM Jean Chretien.
Myboyjack is truly reaching with that argument. Martin is a ditherer, not a scoundrel. And don't confuse 'anti-Americanism' as the same thing as being anti- your current government's substitute for meaningful foreign policy.
The first thing Harper did, by the way, was take a stand on Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic -- hardly the opening gambit of someone whose top priorty was to make the Americans like us Canucks again.
|
|
| 107 | Myboyjack Dude
ID: 014826271 Sun, Feb 12, 2006, 18:37
|
Myboyjack is truly reaching with that argument.
If you read post 103, you didn't understand it.
Which argument are you referring to? This one?
It would be a stretch to argue that Mr. Chirac, Mr. Schroeder and now Paul Martin in Ottawa ran into trouble because of their anti-Americanism. Au contraire, cheap demonization of the Great Satan is almost as popular in the streets of Toronto as in the streets of Islamabad.
|
|
| 108 | Matt S in Brunei
ID: 58120151 Wed, Feb 15, 2006, 02:51
|
Recent happenings are putting a permanent grin on my face (Think Jack Nicholson in Batman.)
If Harper thinks he can get away with appointing an unelected person (Fortier) to an important cabinet position AND a senate seat, and bring over an age old Liberal (Emerson) to occupy another ministerial position, he's kidding himself only.
Even his own party is crumbling. The Progressive wing is pissed at the Emerson hypocracy, and the Reform wing is pissed that very few of their evangelicals have been rewarded with juicy posts.
I can't believe I'm saying it, but I wouldn't mind seeing the Conservatives stay in power for up to a year, just so they can self-destruct a little more. It won't take long before the evangelicals realize they've been betrayed by their preacher, and will reform the Reform. It will be glorious! :-)
Matt S
|
|
| 109 | biliruben Leader
ID: 589301110 Wed, Feb 15, 2006, 14:12
|
Say hey to the Sultan for me, Matt.
I've always wanted to party with that dude.
|
|
| 110 | biliruben Leader
ID: 589301110 Wed, Feb 15, 2006, 14:14
|
Er.. Maybe not.
drug trafficking and illegally importing controlled substances are serious offenses in Brunei and carry a mandatory death penalty
Yikes.
|
|
| 111 | Matt S in Sabah
ID: 46132175 Fri, Feb 17, 2006, 06:46
|
Yes, I was making sure that nobody was sneaking a bag of oregano in my pack for fun. :-)
|
|
| |
| 113 | Dr. Doom
ID: 430271612 Sat, Dec 06, 2008, 15:20
|
It's more like, imagine having your election on Nov. 4 then having McCain attempt to topple the government a month later because the global economic disaster has not been resolved.
|
|
| |
| 115 | Tree
ID: 41512710 Mon, Dec 19, 2011, 11:28
|
i'm not even going to bother reading the article, but every Canadian i know is distraught with the current direction of their new government.
you can start with mandatory minimums for drug sentences. it didn't work here, and it won't work there.
|
|
| 116 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Fri, Feb 17, 2012, 01:44
|
Canada ends long gun registry. Freedom making a comeback in Canada.
Conservatives celebrate and liberals froth at the mouth. Glorious.
|
|
| 117 | Canadian Hack
ID: 164132618 Fri, Feb 17, 2012, 01:51
|
Baldwin you know nothing of Canada.
The strange situation right now is that while ending a long gun registry, the same Conservative government is working to monitor the internet. Strangely guns dont need to be monitored but twitter does.
I see that as a bad trade-off.
|
|
| 118 | Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Fri, Feb 17, 2012, 02:00
|
and liberals froth at the mouth
And Boldwin claims he has nothing in common with liberals.
|
|
| 119 | Tree
ID: 17039238 Fri, Feb 17, 2012, 08:16
|
not to mention Harper's advocacy for failed policies such as mandatory minimums. and i wonder how Baldwin feels about Harper advocating stronger ties to countries such as China.
i will definitely defer to CH on this. my brother - a landed immigrant who has lived in BC with his Canadian wife for close to 15 years now - is unbelievably distraught over Stephen Harper's Canada.
this is not the message board hand-wringing we see here, but a noticeable change in his personality as he is very concerned about his adopted country.
|
|
| 120 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Fri, Feb 17, 2012, 11:30
|
I will say that conservatives in Canada have one foot in the liberal camp compared to conservatives in the USA.
Now if they would just move on to safeguard freedom of speech in Canada.
|
|
| 121 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Fri, Feb 17, 2012, 16:04
|
re 117: These kind of inconsistency drive me insane, I had thought Canada was immune to it.
|
|
| 122 | Tree
ID: 371561716 Fri, Feb 17, 2012, 17:58
|
I had thought Canada was immune to it.
they were doing ok, until they elected a Conservative.
|
|
| 123 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 02:03
|
|
|
| 124 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 13:42
|
Canada goes on the offense I am thinking that if they are correct and gas will go to $5 a gallon, the Canadian offensive will be gaining strength.
|
|
| 125 | Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 14:16
|
Canada might as well go on the offense, since there's no credible defense against charges that tar sand production isn't enviromentally devastating.
A million cubic metres of water is diverted from the Athabasca River to tar sands operations each day. Most of the water ends up as waste in toxic ponds near the river's banks. Nearly a dozen tailings ponds line both sides of the Athabasca River and pose a serious threat to the entire Mackenzie River basin. Many are already leaking and creating their own tainted wetlands. The ponds, which contain a thick mix of water, oil and clay, give off a strong aroma of hydrocarbons and rarely freeze. Fish, birds and other wildlife face death from swimming in or drinking from the ponds.
The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers reports that of 25 chemicals found in every tailings pond and studied by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 14 are human carcinogens. link
|
|
| 126 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 16:19
|
Oh no, fish face death from living in artificial ponds which they don't live in.
|
|
| 127 | sarge33rd
ID: 4717718 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 16:29
|
^ notices how our resident fabricator, totally ignores the birds/wildlife part. Also, the 14 of 25 chemicals being human carcinogens part. Must be, because the facts would get in the way of what he wants.
|
|
| 128 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 16:37
|
There are about a thousand ponds in Canada for every Canadian if not ten thousand.
Don't drink from the fracking ponds and you'll do fine.
|
|
| 129 | Tree
ID: 191411422 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 16:53
|
You're an idiot if you think that fracking ponds are the only water sources affected by fracking.
|
|
| 130 | Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 17:02
|
There are about a thousand ponds in Canada for every Canadian if not ten thousand.
Oh, please, regale us with your vast knowledge of Alberta's geography, topography, and associated eco-systems.
|
|
| 131 | DWetzel
ID: 49962710 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 17:13
|
Guys, come on. You know that water that's in one pond can never ever go into any other part of the water system, and further, you know that containment ponds never ever leak and always work perfectly, because after all, it's always in the corporation's best interest to maintain those flawlessly and not cut any corners because they know they and they alone will be fully liable for any cleanups and damages.
|
|
| 132 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 17:32
|
Canada can spare us a few ponds.
|
|
| 133 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 17:39
|
Baldwin Peninsula, well Alaska, but same difference.
Canada will never even notice a couple thousand fracking ponds. They'll never be missed. And whatever biota was nibbling on the oil in the shale, will just start nibbling on it in the ponds, I'll bet.
|
|
| 134 | Tree
ID: 17039238 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 17:56
|
Baldwin Peninsula, well Alaska, but same difference.
so, something in the northwestern part of the United States is now the same thing as being in Canada?
as the crow flies, the Baldwin Peninsula is closer to Russia, than it is Canada. yet it's the same thing as Canada. lol.
|
|
| 135 | Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 18:00
|
Nice pictures. Of course they have nothing to do with the area in question. it looks like this
|
|
| 136 | DWetzel
ID: 49962710 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 18:02
|
Re: 134 -- can you see it from Sarah Palin's porch? That's all that matters.
|
|
| 137 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 18:03
|
It's one big globe circling tundra.
You guys are being played. Both the Canadian administration and the USA administration and the Sierra Club know full well that countries don't leave wealth greater than the Saudi oil fields untapped just because of a few snail darters.
But before the shale can be mined for great wealth...
...the issue must be plundered by the enviros for all the fundraising they can scare up. Then they let the real gold rush begin.
|
|
| 138 | Tosh Leader
ID: 057721710 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 18:09
|
I'm pretty certain that Baldwin also told us that Louisiana will never notice a couple extra oil wells. link
|
|
| 139 | DWetzel
ID: 49962710 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 18:11
|
Those animals aren't even citizens, dude.
|
|
| 140 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 18:20
|
And that natural biota went wild cleaning up the place for free.
Thank God for Alcanivorax borkumensis and someone go apologize to the gulf oil industry for the hysterical over-reaction.
|
|
| 141 | sarge33rd
ID: 4717718 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 19:42
|
Boldwin, world reknown expert on every topic known to man, and 1/2 dz man has yet to discover even exist.(at least, in his mind he is)
You doubt the truth of the above statement? Just skim this POLITICS FORUM for his posts, and try and show me wrong. I dare ya.
|
|
| 142 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 20:06
|
I'm not an expert on whatever language that was.
|
|
| 143 | DWetzel
ID: 33337117 Tue, Feb 21, 2012, 20:39
|
A statement with which we can all actually agree.
|
|
| 144 | Tree
ID: 17039238 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 00:55
|
You guys are being played. Both the Canadian administration and the USA administration and the Sierra Club know full well that countries don't leave wealth greater than the Saudi oil fields untapped just because of a few snail darters.
the only one here being played is you.
i mean, i realize you live in the 7th largest city in Illinois, which of course, makes you worldly and wise.
my parents have a house in the Catskills. where fracking is being considered. that is the home they plan the retire to. and 20% of it, is my inheritance.
unfortunately, because fracking is being considered and will almost certainly poison their water supply, there's a reasonable chance they'll be selling.
this isn't left vs. right, although the simple thought of something being non-partisan is lost on you. this is, instead, right vs. wrong, and anything that poisons water supplies, is, almost certainly, wrong.
but because you only see things in your warped political spectrum, you can't see the forest for the trees. you are among the simplest of people i've ever encountered, made sadder by you thinking you're among the most intelligent - yet you can't even think for yourself, swayed only by left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative. you don't see what is really there, rather, what you are told to see, and that, is, sad.
|
|
| 145 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 11:32
|
I thought this was about oil sands? when did it change to fracking?
Tree, I am sorry for you I wish you showed that much passion for people of Mississippi delta that are being poisoned by fertilizers up stream, or any of 1000 other poisonings going on, but I guess it is easy to ignore what doesn't effect you directly.
|
|
| 146 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 11:49
|
I guess it is easy to ignore what doesn't effect you directly.
As we see, from most of Boldwin's posts in this thread.
|
|
| 147 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 12:23
|
Tree
Feel free to make the incontrovertable case that fracking destroys aquifers. I haven't seen anyone make the case.
Frankly from what evidence I've seen I'd be more easily swayed that Bakken fracking risks rousing the Yellowstone super-volcano than your concern.
Enviros have raised too many phony boogeymen for me to be easily swayed by every passing breeze of hysteria.
|
|
| 148 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 12:53
|
I am not sure if fracking is dangerous to environment or not but if I had to choose between fracking in my town and oil pipeline I would choose the oil pipe line.
|
|
| 149 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 15:59
|
Fracking/aquifer studyResearchers at the University of Texas, however, say they have "found no direct evidence that fracking itself has contaminated groundwater."
In ScienceNOW, which is published by the AAAS, lead researcher Charles Groat noted "that the $380,000 report was independent from the natural-gas industry and conducted only with university funds."
ScienceNOW reports the study's "underlying white papers were peer-reviewed" and "the Environmental Defense Fund was consulted on the overall scope and design of the study." That information is important. The left cannot moan that the report is a whitewash paid for by the hated energy industry.
"some 99.5% of what is commonly used in fracking" is simply "a composition of pure water and quartz sand."
He noted the other agents that make up the remaining 0.5% are typically guar gum (also used to thicken food products), detergents (like those found at home for washing dishes and clothes) and bactericide (think of the chlorine that treats drinking-water supplies).
Given the facts, the Environmental Protection Agency should stop trying to demonize fracking.
After all, it was EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, not an energy industry shill, who admitted publicly last year that she was "not aware of any proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water."
|
|
| 150 | sarge33rd
ID: 4717718 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 16:04
|
Why was fracking introduced in this disussion? That isnt even the process for extracting shale oil.
|
|
| 151 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 16:29
|
i asked that earlier and got no response so i just joined in on the fracking conversation.
|
|
| 152 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 16:33
|
Tree was afraid he was gonna lose his inheritance due to fracking. Had to show him some mercy.
|
|
| 153 | Tree
ID: 411392215 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 16:48
|
many folks are still confused about Jackson's testimony, because there are countless examples that prove otherwise, going as far back as 1987 and the Parson Well in West Virginia.
Clark, Wyoming. Dimock, PA.
there are numerous examples.
and i have no idea why Baldwin introduced Fracking into the convo, but like just about everything else, he's terribly misguided.
|
|
| 154 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Wed, Feb 22, 2012, 17:01
|
BTW the Bakken continues up into Saskatchewan and is one of the largest oil fields in Canada and will be exploited by fracking.
True the vast majority of Canadian oil reserves are in Alberta oil sands.
|
|
| |
| 156 | Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Thu, Feb 23, 2012, 08:44
|
the Bakken continues up into Saskatchewan and is one of the largest oil fields in Canada and will be exploited by fracking.
This is an admission that the claim that Agenda 21 proponents always get what they want in their drive to re-wild North America is hysterical nonsense.
When farmers and ranchers in the Klamath River basin would face higher power bills due to the possible removal of antiquated dams, it's a case of freedoms being crushed by the evil UN(although not one iota of evidence was presented of UN involvement). But where's the concern for farmers and ranchers in Eastern Montana, North Dakota and Saskathewan whose water supply is threatened through the poisoning effects of fracking?
It's one big globe circling tundra.
It's hard to differentiate between intentional dishonesty and stunning ignorance sometimes. Regardless, the Alberta tar sands operation are not the tundra. As the Athabasca River flows north from tar sands, it is an essential element in the eco-system that includes
Wood Buffalo National Park.
The park was established in 1922 to protect the world's largest herd of free roaming Wood Bison, currently estimated at more than 5,000. It is the only known nesting site of whooping cranes.
The park contains one of the world's largest fresh water deltas, the Peace-Athabasca Delta, formed by the Peace, Athabasca and Birch Rivers. It is also known for its karst sinkholes in the north-eastern section of the park. Wood Buffalo is located directly north of the Athabasca Oil Sands.
This area was designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1983 for the biological diversity of the Peace-Athabasca Delta, one of the world's largest freshwater deltas, as well as the population of wild bison.
Wood Buffalo National Park contains a large variety of wildlife species, such as moose, wood bison, black bear, wolf, lynx, beaver, brown bear, snowshoe hare, Sandhill Crane, Ruffed Grouse, and the world's northernmost population of Red-sided Garter Snakes, which form famous communal dens within the park.
Wood Buffalo Park contains the only natural nesting habitat for the endangered Whooping Crane. Known as Whooping Crane Summer Range, it is classified as a Ramsar site. It was identified through the International Biological Program. The range is a complex of contiguous water bodies, primarily lakes and various wetlands, such as marshes and bogs, but also includes streams and ponds.
In 2007 the world's largest beaver dam (about 850 metres (2,790 ft)) was discovered using satellite imagery within the park
There is no dispute that the tar sands operation promotes environmental degradation, the question is how to mitigate the damage while preserving the environmental integrity of this unique and diverse slice of Canada.
The position that "If enviromentalists are for it, I'm against it; if environmentalists are against it, I'm for it"
isn't a conservative position. It doesn't help find solutions that balance the need for oil and other commercial extraction industries against the long-term health of rivers, lakes, forests, and wildlife.
|
|
| 157 | Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Thu, Feb 23, 2012, 09:08
|
Here's the kind of progress that can be accomplished when radicals like Boldwin are taken out of the equation.
BLM sells oil leases in SE Utah
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management sold 13 oil and gas leases this week without protest. The leases comprised 12,195 acres in the southeastern Utah Canyon Country District.
The sales netted $523,000 and had support from officials in Grand and San Juan counties. Although some nonprofit groups submitted comments questioning air and groundwater protections for the likely development, they did not lodge protests.
Moab-based Living Rivers thanked the agency for reducing the sale acreage to protect areas around Arches National Park, and the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance called the sale validation of the BLM’s current “win-win” approach to energy development and conservation.
“Energy development is moving forward while we continue to protect the great treasures of Grand County,” County Councilwoman Audrey Graham said in a written statement.
|
|
| 158 | Boldwin
ID: 49030519 Thu, Feb 23, 2012, 10:29
|
The range is a complex of contiguous water bodies
What I said and illustrated with pictures...wall to wall lakes. One more holding pond is no...big...deal.
|
|
| 159 | Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Thu, Feb 23, 2012, 11:00
|
What I said and illustrated with pictures
What I said - intentionally dishonest or stunningly ignorant?
|
|
| 160 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Feb 23, 2012, 11:34
|
Can I pick "both"?
|
|
| 161 | Tree
ID: 241112311 Thu, Feb 23, 2012, 12:13
|
well, not to mention that if you poison one pond in a string of contiguous ponds, you're poisoning the other ponds as well.
Schopenhauer's Law of Entropy at work here...
|
|
| |
|