sda2.jpg

May 20, 2005

I Concede

I've been listening for weeks now as Liberals defend their party as though theft was simply a policy issue to debate on its merits - a small part of a larger, more important national picture, sometimes marketed as the Greater Good[tm].

These Liberals seem to genuinely believe that systematic dishonesty is just a point of disagreement for which a sensible compromise could be found, if only both sides would be civil.

"Compromise" is defined by Websters in this way:

"An amicable agreement between parties in controversy, to settle their differences by mutual concessions. "

Well, therein lies the rub. Conservatives aren't wired the same way as you Liberals. As we are so often reminded, we tend to view the world in terms of "black and white".

This Ayn Rand quote is illustrative of this uniquely conservative character flaw, the unreasonably rigid fixation on notions of right and wrong as though they are, you know - meaningful.

"In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube."

Stupid woman. Rand should have known that so-called "poison" can be ingested safely if dosage remains within limits of toxicity. Lives are saved through chemotherapy every day by the very pharmaceuticals that would kill you instantly if administered in overdose. The grey area between safety and toxicity is scientific fact - a property of every chemical substance on earth, with the exception of agricultural pesticides, growth hormones and fertilizers.

Still, hard wired as the conservative that I am, I can't help myself. I can't quite resolve a middle ground between good and evil. While on some intellectual level I'm sure I know better - I cannot shake the belief that beaurocratic corruption is an institutional character fault so grave that it should disqualify those afflicted from any position of power. In the case of the Liberal Party of Canada, I believe the party should be deregistered. I know this is harsh, but that's how I think. Black. White. Crime. Punishment.

It's not as though the question of corruption remains in dispute. An announced $750,000 trust fund indicates that Mr. Martin's Liberals have moved past denial and presumption of innocence, and have entered the plea bargain phase.

While I acknowledge this is progress of a sort, in the greater scope of events, it's pretty clear that my outdated "conservative" definition of justice, a justice that includes punishment, will not be realized. Having admitted guilt, there will be no penalty outside of "community service".

The Liberal Party will not only continue to exist, they shall continue to govern and enjoy the privilage of stealing from me for the greater good.

So, to my fellow moderate, mainstream, compromising Liberal Canadian citizens so tolerant of the mischievious ways of our political masters - today I concede.

You win. I lose. You are right. I was wrong. You were always right, and I was always wrong.

Having broken the shackles of black and white, I'm ready to venture into this brave new ethical world of "Grey" and work with you. I can't say I understand it, but nonetheless - it's time to adapt.

As my first step, as a show of good faith, I've arranged a compromise with you. We will find a middle ground between "honesty" and "dishonesty", a happy litlle grey parking spot between "respect for property" and "systematic theft".

In my previous life in the world of black and white, "fairness" would demand participation of two consenting negotiators to arrive at "mutual concession'. I'm glad we can dispense with that outdated notion.

I'm going to play by your rules. Just as I had no place at the table when you were conceding the fundamental honour and integrity of the political system I must live under, you'll surely understand this compromise that I have chosen for you.

You get to keep your Liberal Party and then some - you may also keep your Liberal government in perpetuity.

Easy? Easy.

In exchange I am going to impose a similar system of institutionalized theft on you, but in a more streamlined version. (Some conservative habits die hard) .

While your political party is stealing my money to fund their own election campaigns and in turn, reward their supporters (which would be you and the others who vote for them), in my parallel system, we've cut out the middleman.

I've made a deal with your bank. They have agreed to allow me, at the time of my choosing, to dip into your personal account and take a few dollars when I need them. Or alternately, when I want them. It's nothing to get worried about, because the amounts I take will be such a tiny percentage of the bank's overall holdings.

I won't be telling you when I'll be accessing your account, how much I'm going to take or how I will spend it. (I negotiated that, too.)

Because this is a democracy, you will have the right to complain just as much as you wish - so long as you remain civil. No anger allowed, because I really am uncomfortable - distrustful really - of angry people. They scare me.

If the tone of your complaint meets with my approval, I will go back to the bank and we shall sit down and discuss your grievance. The process will be completely democratic. You may watch and you can comment, and you will even cast a vote. You, me and the banker all cast votes.

Majority rules.

Then, after the majority has ruled, I'll admit that maybe I took some of your money, look you straight in the eye and tell you I'm very, very sorry about the mess and give you my solemn pledge - let me be very, very clear about this - not to steal from your personal account until next time.

Then, I'll instruct your banker to increase your account fees. We shall then distribute the extra revenues to the bank accounts of your like-minded mainstream Liberal Canadian friends.

They, in turn, will remind you that we do not live in a world of black and white.


Posted by Kate at May 20, 2005 5:38 PM
TrackBacks

Letter From Canada from the ewrks diaries
Letter to the BBC, May 21, 2005 Sadly, the mainstream media in Canada has consistently downplayed or withheld numerous key facts concerning the scandal. Among these is the infamous "paragraph K" in the Gomery Commission's terms of reference which m... [Read More]

Tracked on May 21, 2005 2:20 PM

Kate Caves to the New Liberal Reality from Quotulatiousness
Kate, of Small Dead Animals, has finally realized that the battle is not worth fighting. She's conceding, and re-aligning her world to fit the new reality: The Liberal Party will not only continue to exist, they shall continue to govern... [Read More]

Tracked on May 21, 2005 5:04 PM

The Debut from Cotillion
What is the Cotillion? First and foremost, it is a celebration of the diverse voice that is the conservative woman. Not just one person can speak for us, and no one person should have that obligation. There are so many of us here and willing to sh... [Read More]

Tracked on May 31, 2005 3:55 AM

Continuing the Dance from MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
What is the Cotillion? First and foremost, it is a celebration of the diverse voice that is the conservative woman. Not just one person can speak for us, and no one person should have that obligation. There are so many of us here and willing to share... [Read More]

Tracked on May 31, 2005 7:07 AM

Continuing the Dance from MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
What is the Cotillion? First and foremost, it is a celebration of the diverse voice that is the conservative woman. Not just one person can speak for us, and no one person should have that obligation. There are so many of us here and willing to share... [Read More]

Tracked on May 31, 2005 7:07 AM

Cotillion from thebandwagon
Welcome to Cotillion [Read More]

Tracked on May 31, 2005 9:02 AM

The Debut by Jody from Common Sense Runs Wild
What is the Cotillion? First and foremost, it is a celebration of the diverse voice that is the conservative woman. Not just one person can speak for us, and no one person should have that obligation. There are so many [Read More]

Tracked on May 31, 2005 11:41 AM

The Presentation by Beth from Common Sense Runs Wild
Welcome, Ladies and Gentlemen, to the Inaugural of the Cotillion! Please allow me to introduce myself I'm a woman of wealth and taste I've been around for a long, long year Stole many a man's soul and faith And I [Read More]

Tracked on May 31, 2005 2:33 PM

What is the Cotillion? from Cotillion
What is the Cotillion? First and foremost, it is a celebration of the diverse voice that is the conservative woman. Not just one person can speak for us, and no one person should have that obligation. There are so... [Read More]

Tracked on January 29, 2006 1:29 PM

What is the Cotillion? from Cotillion
What is the Cotillion? First and foremost, it is a celebration of the diverse voice that is the conservative woman. Not just one person can speak for us, and no one person should have that obligation. There are so... [Read More]

Tracked on January 29, 2006 1:30 PM

Comments

You rock, Kate. Way to spell it out.

Posted by: Curbside at May 20, 2005 5:56 PM

I know this comment is rather simplistic, but I bet people that vote Liberal will also spend an hour screaming on the phone with the bank when their fees do go up by a few dollars. Funny that.

Posted by: Tom at May 20, 2005 5:57 PM

That just about sums the whole ugly condition up. Did you draw it from the Blackberry (maybe instructions to BS, likely quoted from "Libranoism for Dummies")!

Posted by: SEchappe at May 20, 2005 6:02 PM

Kate, thanks for quoting Ayn Rand. But you forgot to tell them who she was. I'm sure most of them don't know.

Very funny post. But the best way to de-register a corrupt Liberal government is to, well, just walk away, and take all the oil, crops and trees with us.

Last week I didn't paint at all, hoping for something good to come of this. Now all I want to do is paint. But everything is coming out dark. I think I've re-entered my minimalist stage of many years ago.

Posted by: John Crittenden at May 20, 2005 6:11 PM

Wow. Great Post! That really says it all..

Posted by: Toronto Tory at May 20, 2005 6:13 PM

Good point. I'll add a Randian link. Call it Moonbat Fertilizer.

Posted by: Kate at May 20, 2005 6:16 PM

Please get involved in your local riding and GET YOURSELF ELECTED.

You would make an AMZING MP !!

If you don't do that let's start a campaign to get Kate hired by the CPC ottawa as a spokesperson . . . . We neeed this kind of storytelling to be available on mainstream TV as a pundit. Something even people in the GTA can understand

Your story has made my day & started of the long weekend on a happy note !!

Posted by: Paul at May 20, 2005 6:17 PM

How can anyone explain this any better?
I doubt anyone can.
Keep writing.
cheers :) majere

Posted by: roger m roeder at May 20, 2005 6:18 PM

This passes the Department of truth!
Double plus good!

Posted by: ridenrain at May 20, 2005 6:18 PM

No offence to Kate, but our MP Carol Skelton is excellent, the best I've ever had.

Now, when she decides to hang it up, and if we haven't separated yet (here's hoping) . . . .

Cheers,
lance

Posted by: Lance at May 20, 2005 6:31 PM

I haven't yet figured out how to make Trackback work on my Blogspot blog. In lieu of that, here:

http://robot_guy.blogspot.com/2005/05/makes-perfect-sense-to-me.html

Posted by: Ed Minchau at May 20, 2005 6:39 PM

Moral relativism: stealing is okay as long as it is for the Liberal cause. Libranos rule!

You can check out Pope Benny, as he has written quite profusely on this concept.

If your not persuaded perhaps the Joe Morsellis of the world can induce one to change their mind.

Congratulations!! Right and wrong do matter.

What the Libranos have engineered is the divorce of voters from their public institutions. Their tainted authority from stolen elections is an insult to all voters. "Get ye gone" ye Parliamentary brigands!!

Posted by: Hans Rupprecht at May 20, 2005 6:51 PM

Well said, Kate. I've never been able to see things in black and white, myself, but I sure admire a fine etching. I'd say this post belongs in the Best of SDA.

Posted by: Laura at May 20, 2005 6:54 PM

Kate, I agree with you completely. And you know, some of us Americanos got pretty caught up in this thing ourselves, and I'm very disappointed with the way things have gone.

I think I have an exact perception in respect to the way the Libranos see the world. It even basically originates from the context of their own business partnership.

"It is me and Lefty Guns [Lefty Ruggiero] in a hotel bar in Miami Beach. Tourists, tacky decor, and women with scary tans. Lefty is my Mafia mentor, the Bonanno family soldier who is educating me in the conduct expected of a mobster. Me, I'm a good listener. So we're sitting there having a few drinks and talking about this and that, when it occurs to me to ask Lefty what I think I a pretty good question.

'Hey, Lefty? What's the advantage for me in being a wiseguy?'

"Lefty looks at me like I'm the world's biggest moron. He gets excited and jumps out of his chair and starts yelling and waving his arms. 'What are you, fucking crazy?' he says. 'Are you fucking nuts? When you're a wiseguy, you can steal, you can cheat, you can lie, you can kill people -- and it's all legitimate.'

"That, in a nutshell, is the way of the wiseguy: Whatever crazy stuff you do, whatever racket you are into, it is all legitimate. The wiseguy does not see himself as a criminal or even a bad person; he sees himself as a businessman, a shrewd hustler, one step ahead of ordinary suckers."

-- from The Way of the WiseGuy, by Donnie Brasco

I think that Brasco (Joe Pistone who infiltrated the Bonanno crime family) sums it up succinctly. If there is any distinction between the Librano$ mindset and that of their business partners, it is a distinction too fine to bother try to discern.


Posted by: Greg (outside Dallas) at May 20, 2005 6:55 PM

Kate, you really know how to say it. Have you ever considered publishing some of this stuff, maybe a column in a newspaper?
Keep up the great work, you're a credit to Canadian conservatism. Hopefully, someday, that won't be an oxymoron.
R. King

Posted by: Ryan J. King at May 20, 2005 7:02 PM

A good effort, but again misses analyzing the premise.

Kate, I can't make put much simpler.

People pay taxes
Government collects a lot of money from taxes
Government spends a lot of this money
Organized crime likes money
Organized crime sees government programs and politicians as easily corruptable/blackmailable.. do I have to continue?

The people stealing our money are CRIMINALS. They are being INVESTIGATED by the RCMP.

Kate, why do you hate the RCMP so much? Why are you trying to minimize the investigation, and dismiss it as blanket party corruption? Do you know something the RCMP doesn't?

Corporations steal and steal every day - they are very creative at hiding it too. Look at WorldCom, Enron, even our own Nortel to name a few. I expect our police to catch those responsible when they do break the law. We cannot take away their ability to operate (delist them) until they are tried. They are judged and punished accordingly, and shareholders can decide whether to sell the stock (and maybe buy some of the competition's) based on their assesment of the company as a whole.

Anyway, your comparison doesn't hold. Governments work for the people, while people work for corporations. I can trust the government to protect me from dangerous corporate practices such as environmental poisoning, as they are not solely profit motivated. I cannot trust corporations to do the same. I cannot trust private individuals to manage my money as much as you would. Your argument is appropriately absurd, because the premise it is based on is similarly absurd.

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 7:18 PM

excuse me.. "put it" not "make put".. funny as it sounds.

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 7:19 PM

Another salient post Kate....but it only appeals to those not of dogmatic liberal ilk. A bit of singing to the choir as it were. The message is wasted. Explaining the absolutism of ethics to a liberal is like explaining quantum math or astral physics to a sand flea....both are done in hopes of breaking through a geneticly programmed barrier to more evolved values and higher knowing.

Good luck all the same, miracles sometines occur.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at May 20, 2005 7:28 PM

Killer speech Kate, as always. There is no rest until the Evil Empire is destroyed or isolated to there own Dark Kingdom.

Posted by: rob at May 20, 2005 7:30 PM

Thank you Kate. I really appreciate your way with words. I too was raised to think in Black and White. Even my 2 year old granddaughter can understand right versus wrong in "the Fierce Bad Rabbit" by Beatrix Potter!

Posted by: R. Agnes at May 20, 2005 7:31 PM

KATE!!! DON'T DO IT!!! You're going to the "Dark Side". I KNOW you think it's the way to get unlimited financial power but it will corrupt you and steal your soul. Stay with us and be our friend. Fight the good fight for justice and all that is good. Stay in the light (helps to keep the tan). Besides, heavy breathing sound effects aside, you won't look good in that black plastic helmet, mask and cape!

The world can be more black and white, Kate. As some corny green creature with Grover's voice said: "DO....OR DO NOT!" It's our choice...

So don't be such a Darth Martin.

Posted by: Martin B. at May 20, 2005 7:31 PM

Remarkably well-drawn analogy - loved it! Keep up the good work!

Posted by: ruthbiller at May 20, 2005 7:33 PM

mockpuppet, you forgot the UN. $40 Billion stolen and climbing (after we scrape of the cockroaches).

Continue your progression, mocky .....

Corporations work for their stock holders. If the stock holders don't like what they do, they make changes in the board. And stock holders are anyone with stock. The more stock the more influence. So cororporations listen to those with the most influence.

The government is staffed by the civil service. The civil service works for politicians. In order to get elected, politicians require influence. Anyone providing the more influence gets the most attention from a politician, and thus gets the most say in what the politician is going to do.

See the similiarity.

But here is where it ends....

Corporations are required to be audited. If the auditor finds criminal activity, someone goes to jail.

If the government auditor finds criminal activity, who get to decide the action. The same entity that was involved in the criminal activity.

Que ipsos .....

Posted by: capt joe at May 20, 2005 7:39 PM

Black and white are shades of grey. Good and evil are two sides of the same coin. You continue to try to call out Good! Evil! all the time not understanding that there is such a coin.

Your dualist arguments are incapable of solutions. If you cannot see this way, then you will be wrong in your characterizations of Black and White.

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 7:50 PM

That's where I was going with that

"If the government auditor finds criminal activity, who get to decide the action. The same entity that was involved in the criminal activity"

The people do in the election. Which we did, and Conservatives lost to a minority Liberal gov't backed by the NDP. Or did you forget that part?

Now.. if you want to keep calling elections and disintegrating parties every time a politician, group of them, and/or organized crime finds a way to steal from us and it is exposed - who's going to be able to do anything around here? I don't feel like living in a police state.

Are you one for torches and lynchings like the old days of your party, or will you be civil, and let the RCMP do their job.

If it's a systematic problem then neither party is immune. Civil servants can also be corrupted, we will then need to engage in better accountability for all parties.

Don't get me wrong.. I'm pissed at the gun registry money, the UN money, the airbus money, the hotel/golf course money,sponsorship money it goes on and on. The solution is not to switch one set of dead spark plugs for another.

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 7:58 PM

or in your case.. small dead animals.

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 7:59 PM

hmmm...mock puppet must be tired of the drivel handed out at the wingbat sites and desperate for some intelligent conversation.

Brilliant analogy, Kate.

Posted by: Candace at May 20, 2005 8:07 PM

mockpuppet,
The relative merits of free enterprise versus socialism.
You sound confused.
I trust you have books on this subject in your library,if not I will with all sincerity send you one of mine to shed more light on the subject if you wish.
doug

Posted by: doug at May 20, 2005 8:17 PM

I always here the Librano$ say they are a "Progressive" party and have come to take it as "We will Progressively lead you into Socialism"

Therefore following that analogy Liberal=Socialism

So based on history Socialism=Corruption

Which gives Liberal=Socialism=Corruption

Yea, that's got to be right, all sides of the equation balance.

Posted by: rob at May 20, 2005 8:23 PM

"Democracy", hows that quote go?
"THE WORST FORM OF GOVERNMENT EXCEPT FOR ALL THE REST"

Posted by: doug at May 20, 2005 8:24 PM

very well turned. the only thing i would add is the fact that, should the Liberal Canadian object, they will automatically be branded as hostile toward the banks very existence, and precluded from even discussing how you're continuing to steal their money.

Posted by: markdsgraham at May 20, 2005 8:26 PM

"The solution is not to switch one set of dead spark plugs for another."

Quite so. Perhaps an entire new car is in order. Now how does that analogy work? Or an engine overhaul?

Posted by: Anne Elliot at May 20, 2005 8:27 PM

you still can't get past your black and white analysis. Socialism vs. Free enterprise.. grow up already. I have plenty of books on compassion and fraternity, care to read one?

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 8:29 PM

conservatives have a good part in what built this car.. we should look at a new mode of transportation altogether. Something like this, but more like www.dailykos.com

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 8:30 PM

Kate: That is the best post I have seen and one of the best you've done here at SDA.
I hope Andrew Coyne has a heads up on this one.
Mockpuppet: The liberal government IS corporate thievery. They are stealing from the "corporation of Canada. US. OUR tax dollars and they use it like their own. Know your enemy. Then go for 'em.
Damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead.

Posted by: Snowbunnie at May 20, 2005 8:31 PM

If I told you that Iraq had WMD's and were going to attack imminently, would you also "damn" the torpedoes!

Trigger happy chickenhawk. I'd like to see you confront the mob leaders in person yourself and tell them you are angry and want them to stop.

Stop trying to fornicate with everyone else's privates! Put your money where your mouth is Snowbunnie.

Go get a law degree, or become an RCMP. Fight corruption from somewhere else than hiding behind your keyboard, then come to me and whine about how much you hate it ok?

(I keep my f-ing promises)

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 8:41 PM

Democrats=Liberals No difference, equation balances.

Clinton/Belindarella/Dithers = same shit different day

(Belindarella is the pig in the middle)

Down with Liberals
Down with Democrats

Posted by: rob at May 20, 2005 8:42 PM

mockpuppet could be Warn, Red-Green, Abnormal, Bill Ckinton, maybe.


For the scoop on mockpuppet and his comrades visit:


http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog

Looney moonbats from the left are welcome there.

Posted by: maz2 at May 20, 2005 8:45 PM

Just like a typical Conservative bully. Confront them head on, and they back down - then watch them resort to discrediting the source and ignoring the problem..

how about it? are you going to Iraq to die based on an inquiry.. oops.. apparently the reform party has just done that.

First they sneak into federal politics on the coattails of a discredited conservative party. then they fail to get a national mandate even in the face of obvious massive corruption scandals. then they try and try to take down parliament any way they can - even siding with the Bloc, to no avail. Get the message - the right has no place in governance. (opposition maybe.)

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 8:53 PM

mockpuppet is trying to swing the thread totally off topic. He accepts corruption, he condones mob tactics, a party with no ethics or integrity. His head is totally grey and can't see black from white, good from evil.

Sympathy must be the order of the day for mockpuppet, as he will be isolated as we proceed into a number of nations. Quebec being first, 2009, Alberta second, and whom ever may follow. Pasports required to go from country to country, apply now.

Posted by: rob at May 20, 2005 9:04 PM

Real compassion and fraternity are private functions, not mandatable by the state as a way to relieve certain individuals of having to ever offer another thought to the conditions of those less fortunate.
And where's all the money your Martinites promised for tsunami relief? Still in Desmarais' bank?
The money our parish raised in one weekend's collections has long since been sent over, the purchases from those proceeds distributed, and a thank-you letter received. I can assure you that it was much less than the nine-figure amount Mr Martin promised to send.
(sliding slightly off-topic, but FTW, it seemed to fit).

Posted by: bob at May 20, 2005 9:06 PM

"the right has no place in governance"
what about George W Bush?

Posted by: doug at May 20, 2005 9:06 PM

Wowser!!!!!


Check out:


http://www.harperliberals.ca

The light is getting brighter.


Come to the Light.

Liberals are moving to the right/light.


Go, Stephen Harper.

Posted by: maz2 at May 20, 2005 9:08 PM

Fuckpuppet,

I'll come and see you, tough guy.

Posted by: jhuck at May 20, 2005 9:11 PM

GODDAMNITKATE! For the first half of that I was ready to come home(back to the gap between AB and MB) and kick your butt! Very well put. lol

Posted by: Richard Evans at May 20, 2005 9:12 PM

Libpuppet, one doesn't have to have a law degree or be an RCMP to fight crime. You can vote the crooks out. Or you can start a blog to get the word out, as Kate has done.

But instead, you like to troll and call people names. You shouldn't be so full of hate.

Posted by: jhuck at May 20, 2005 9:18 PM

maz2,

A convert, one of many, the walls are crumbling, and the occupants are scared. The mob (not the librano mob) is coming to the gate demanding justice.

Where is our MONEY!
Lock the CROOKS UP!
Throw away the KEY!
Down with the Librano$, and give us our damn money back!

Posted by: rob at May 20, 2005 9:18 PM

Did somebody just call Bush a righty? Dude - give your head a shake.

Posted by: Darcey at May 20, 2005 9:18 PM

what's that I hear Harper saying now? He wants to WAIT a while and build NATIONAL support?

That should keep him busy for a while, as the more evolved go back to work, and leave the whining for the greedy jealous type.

Canada is a great country, if you don't like it.. the borders are wide open, be my guest!

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 9:25 PM

jhuck,

"I'll come and see you, tough guy."

No worries there mate, mockpuppet is a socialist worm to afraid to use his real email address so he can't be traced.

I here Kate starting up her Dodge, he better crawl back into the sewer quick.

Posted by: rob at May 20, 2005 9:25 PM

There you go again, complaining about the symptoms but doing nothing about the disease.

www.dailykos.com

Posted by: mockpuppet at May 20, 2005 9:32 PM

www.dailykos.com - Note: positioned on the left.

LLL moonbat site with the apprentice mockpuppet.

Posted by: rob at May 20, 2005 9:34 PM

Dailykos is the largest hatefest and tinfoil hat gathering. Fortunately they're all talk, just like Libpuppet, who is also full of hate.

Posted by: jhuck at May 20, 2005 9:36 PM

Rob, company's here, so I can't continue the fun with puppetgirl, have a good long weekend.

Posted by: jhuck at May 20, 2005 9:40 PM

Kate for Senator! No wait, we can't elect our Senators. You have to be some left wing windbag with a PHD in "The Victimology of Women" or something lame like that before Dithers would appoint you. So um, I don't know, Kate for premier of Saskatchewan?

Posted by: Raging Ranter at May 20, 2005 9:59 PM

Kate,

You rock.

I had already been convinced by today's Toronto Star that everything was Stephen Harper's fault because he pressured Paul Martin into dirty sleezy bribes.

Now, you have sealed the deal. None of what is happening is wrong. It is all part of the normal ebb and flow of politics in Canada.

I am so relieved. I can now revert to my natural fetal position of voting Liberal.

Why was I so stupid to think I should consider voting for someone ethical like Stephen Harper?

I will never do something so foolish again.

Posted by: Brian Smith at May 20, 2005 10:02 PM

Hey Cockpuppet, I thought you didn't like angry people. After all, when Stephen Harper gets angry, it's "SCARY". Anyone dumb enough to think that compassion can come from a book is obviously too stupid to appreciate the finer points of a political debate, so why don't you pull your foot out of your mouth and walk out while you're ahead.

"I have plenty of books on compassion and fraternity, care to read one?"

That's the difference between us Conservative/Libertarian types, and socialist ass clowns like yourself. We don't need to read books to know what compassion is. Only a socialist could be dumb enough to believe that reading a book about compassion could make them more compassionate. That's because in order to be "compassionate" in the socialist/secular humanist sense, you must first learn the appropriate language, the mindless platitudes, the braindead buzzwords, the childish slogans, and all the other politically correct boilerplate nonsense. Only then can you claim to be truly "compassionate".

Now go attend a demonstration somewhere, little man.

Posted by: Raging Ranter at May 20, 2005 10:12 PM

Perhaps Mockpuppet is correct, perhaps honesty and honor is alien to canadian politics. It could very well be that all virtues should only be treated as a mask, that indeed all civil servants should be distrusted, even the RCMP upper officers, and certain up and comers in the lower ranks. As in the quote,

"First they sneak into federal politics on the coattails of a discredited conservative party."

From one perspective, moonbat Mockpuppet is correct, from another perspective they boldly strode into federal politics picking up the battered, innocent casualies of a discredited and formerly corrupt conservatives. I suppose it all depends upon your level of cynicism, but again you are correct in stating that vigilance and cynicism are neccesary here.
"Then they fail to get a national mandate even in the face of obvious massive corruption scandals."
Again this could be perceived as you have so poetically as a flaw in the conservatives policy and platform, or it could be indicative of the very mass, volume, and complete pervasiveness this corruption has spread to. As well you could interpret this as indicative of the apathy that allowed this corruption to spread in the first place. But who am I to disabuse you of your warm and cozy hatred of anything that intrudes upon the gloom of your cynicism.
"Then they try and try to take down parliament any way they can - even siding with the Bloc, to no avail."
Are the Bloc already a seperate country in your mind, have they already declared quebec autonomous? No they haven't have they therefore they are still a legitamate party within parliament. Certainly they are more legitamately there than the Liberals, who if parliamentary law were followed would have been declared ineligeble for riding nomination until the sponsorship affair were handled and any questionable members set aside for court. Also It is the duty of the opposition on all fronts including the duplicitous NDP to ensure that the laws of parliament are being followed by the government. Thus anything less than what they have been doing would be treason to the crown and treason to their constituents. Obviously I am not speaking of the NDP here. Again this failure of the opposition to bring down the government could, like in your case, be interpreted as a weakness of policy and or virtue. Or it could be indicative of the depth and breadth of the dragon these knights have to slay.

"Get the message - the right has no place in governance. (opposition maybe.)"

Now YOU get the message, Mockpuppet, if virtue and honor have no place in governance this country is not worth paying taxes for. If corruption should be allowed to rule with inpunity, all is indeed lost. But if you are going to come out of your hibernation den of cynicism self doubt mistrust for others and convince others like yourself to do the same. Then maybe just maybe after a long long fight with many casualties going down in flames before this monumentally huge dragon of corruption, we may again have a country worth being proud of again. And I quote,"Don't get me wrong.. I'm pissed at the gun registry money, the UN money, the airbus money, the hotel/golf course money,sponsorship money it goes on and on. The solution is not to switch one set of dead spark plugs for another." Too true but the solution also is not to do nothing, in fact very often the solution is to take the sparkplugs out try some new ones, if they don't work, maybe take a look at the carbeurator and timing, and so on untill the damn thing runs without having to hit it with a hammer.

Daryl

Posted by: Daryl at May 20, 2005 10:19 PM

WL Mackenzie Redux said "Explaining the absolutism of ethics to a liberal is like explaining quantum math or astral physics to a sand flea....both are done in hopes of breaking through a geneticly programmed barrier to more evolved values and higher knowing."

You're in trouble now WL. I think the Liberal Women's Caucus is meeting right now to discuss demanding an apology to all sand fleas.

"The Liberal Women's Caucus has several sand fleas on retainer, who act as researchers and policy advisors. These sand fleas are integral to Liberal policy formation, and it is unconscionable for anyone to make remarks of that nature. We demand WL apologize at once. In fact, Stephen Harper should apologize too."

Posted by: Raging Ranter at May 20, 2005 10:20 PM

Cockpuppet?? (CP)

pretty good, considering that CP is shelling out more insult than argument ;)

Anyway, mock/cock whatever, for one looking for shades of gray, how come all your agreements are based on the same form of either/or dualism. I mean, re-read your points. All either/or.

And what's with all the non sequitors. Yeah, the talk is about the liberals and corruption and suddenly for you it's iraq, WMD, chickenhawks, etc, ad nauseaum. jeez man.

I mean, do you LLL guys have only one speed, "rote drone" or what. What the point of even discussing things with you. Or maybe that is exactly the point.

Posted by: capt joe at May 20, 2005 10:38 PM

Oh the rage, the out right astonishment. With Belinda gone the conservatives have no one tied to Power Corp and M Strong. How will this country survive. The Librano$ are Canada, and Canada is run by the circle of Power Corp.

What are we to do, Power Corp must maintain power. If the conservatives get in, our funding will be cut off. We must do everything to discredit Harper and the cons. They must not take control or there will be investigations. I call on all Canadaian(Moonbats) not to let this happen. Power corp/Martin/Strong must survive...

/sarcasim off

Posted by: rob at May 20, 2005 10:39 PM

the solution, here, is not to change the sparkplugs, but to take the old heap to the boneyard and recycle it. An industrial crusher can do amazing things with a car, ( same as Saddam Hussein did with an industrial wood-chipper). Either way- you never have to deal with it again, and it sure as hell discourages others from pulling the same stunt.

Posted by: dave at May 20, 2005 10:51 PM

Kate - this should be sent to every Letters to the Editor in Canada. Try the community newspapers - the independants- they may be less infiltrated.

BTW - the $750,000 trust fund account the Liberals set up? According to Ablonsky today in QP the balance there is 0.00.

They only SAID they were putting the money in in case there was an election. That's the Liberal Way you have to practice.

Now they don't have to. They will get their $2 million from elections Canada and now that they SAID they put the money in trust the media will tell us - well they SAID they did it so that's good enough. Quit being "angry". Play nice.

Posted by: Stan K. at May 20, 2005 11:00 PM

So Simple So True But Certain Places And People Will Never Even Have A Clue What You Said Because They Are So In Touch With Black They Cant Believe There Is Any Other Color

Posted by: Brett at May 20, 2005 11:02 PM

Dante,s Inferno
All hope is lost those who enter here.

I dont believe we are in hell yet so there is still hope.
I believe conservatives have a very good chance of getting rid of the crooks in the election coming up.
Im believing canadians will vote against the corruption which presents conservatives with an excellant opportunity,we very much need to capitalise on this and work towards this window of opportunity while it lasts.I guess that means involvement any way we can,Im speaking to myself here as I have trouble getting off the couch other than to go to the fridge.
If the corruption party gets back in this election I truly do fear Dantes Inferno.

Posted by: doug at May 20, 2005 11:15 PM

Kate...YOU ROCK. (have I seen this somewhere before?)
After the budget vote I was almost ashamed to say I was Canadian, but as long as someone like you is out there telling it like it is, there IS hope.
Never stop girl.

Posted by: AlmostAlberta at May 21, 2005 12:25 AM

Hey Doug,

Your right of course, and I'm continuing the fight, but I'm paralleling it with the separation strategy, If the election fails, the jump option has to be there as well.

If I, and others, were to continue on a singular path, there is not to many places you can go if the plan fails.

You know a little bit about me, and know that the basic strategy has to switch from reactive to proactive, defense to the aggressor, singular to multiple options. It's the only way it will work.

Thus my reason for becoming a card carrying separatist so that the defensive strategy can be quickly turned into the aggressor with no mercy. It's not anti Canadian etc. etc., it's just good planning to have multiple exit strategies.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 12:36 AM

Here in Tranna Ontario, des only git's excited bout when de cable TVs goes up. Yup, de only time I seen em' git excited round here. But boys they did git it up though, maybes we tories kin tells dem Tranna hi-societies types we is gonna raise em' kable Tvs bill. That aught to git em excited!!

Posted by: Brian Walsh at May 21, 2005 12:45 AM

"Stupid woman. Rand should have known that so-called "poison" can be ingested safely if dosage remains within limits of toxicity"

Rand wasn't a biologist. Toxic is a relative term as there are no toxic substances, just toxic amounts. Gaaah.

I think it's time for some rather uncivil disobedience.

Posted by: Sean at May 21, 2005 12:48 AM

Didn't SoDamn InSane read Dostoyevski? I'm sure the Liberals too, like Radya, were disgusted at the THOUGHT of the crime before it was committed...(default to sarcasm)

Posted by: habamusrodentum at May 21, 2005 2:13 AM

Sean is correct. It's time we started oppossing the Liberals directly. And the means have always been there in the Provinces. Alberta alone has had 3 great opportunities to stick it to the federal Liberals in the last few years.

The gun registry.

Health Care.

Same sex marriage.

All of these are areas that the province could have stood up to the federales in, but the lame duck Klein didn't.

It's time we start, from thr grass roots up.

Posted by: BlueEyes at May 21, 2005 2:16 AM

Okay, a stupid question maybe - but does all this mean that the liberals get to keep the money?

Posted by: Jay at May 21, 2005 5:22 AM

that question assumes the Liberals were ever really going to give it back. I mean, if you can bilk and steal money from the masses, and survive THAT, what in God's name would ever convince you to give back what you stole?

Posted by: firebrand at May 21, 2005 5:53 AM

Kate:

The rain it raineth every day,
It raineth on the just and the unjust fella,
But mostly on the just, because,
The unjust hath the just's umbrella.

Posted by: JJM at May 21, 2005 6:40 AM

Western Standard?

Unable to comment? Problem here or there?

Posted by: maz2 at May 21, 2005 9:58 AM

It�s isn�t simply the Liberals. There is a deeper problem with our political system. As I've posted elsewhere in Shotgun, compare Canada with Australia.
Australia has a vibrant economy, with a higher GDP than Canada, and is, unlike Canada, robustly visible on the international scene.

What has happened in Canada over the last generation, is the erosion of democracy. This has been enabled by a political infrastructure amenable to such an erosion. Why? Because it is set up as unaccountable and alienated from an electorate.

The Australian political system is, like that of Canada, the US, etc - bicameral. Two houses. BUT, unlike Canada's, the entire Australian (and US) system is accountable to the electorate. Both houses are elected.

In Australia, the Senate has 76 seats. Twelve EACH from each of the six states (provinces) and two from each of the two territories. Notice the equality. Notice the accountability. one half of the state members are elected every 3 years..for a six year term. The territorial elections are every 3 years. Notice the responsiveness, the accountability to the electorate, the clear agenda of variation to prevent any one-agenda take-over.

The Senate in Canada? About 105 members. ALL, ALL, ALL are patronage. NONE, NONE are accountable to any electorate. Only to the person and party who appointed them, and to their ...ahem...morality. No fixed terms; keep this taxpaid nonsense until the age of 75. Are we insane?

The Australian House of Representatives, akin to our commons, is 150 members..elected for 3 years. Ours is 308 members (why so many...???) and for at least 5 years.

What we have set up in Canada is a system that can readily be moved beyond the reach of the electorate, beyond any and all accountability, and beyond the electorates ability to change.

The extent of the patronage system in Canada is enormous. Note merely the Senate, but, the G-G, the judges, the deputy ministers, the heads of our media systems (CBC, CRTC) which control our information systems, Bell Canada, Via Rail..the list goes on an on. Health care systems, research systems...they are all appointed.

What this sets up, in a population of ONLY 32 million (Australia has 20 million) is a system that can be rapidly and easily corrupted. That is exactly what has happened over the last generation. (A larger population can also be corrupted but it's easier in a smaller population). Note how Australia has genuinely worked to prevent such a corrupt takeover, while Canada has set itself up for corruption.

Are we that naive to believe that each and every individual in our political and economic realm operates ethically? Morally? With accountability to the public that PAYS THEM?? How dumb can we be?

Our political system has been corrupted, in that most of our political and economic power has moved beyond the reach of the electorate. They are not elected; they are not accountable to elected officials. They are beyond the reach of the Auditor-General (and note how the Liberals denigrate Sheila Fraser and try to prevent her from reporting, from searching..).

So- since most of this power has moved into unaccountability, what has emerged is a cabal of power - the PowerCorp/Desmarais Group...an almost inevitable emergence in a small closely knit population..especially one that has reduced electorate participation in the gov't by the insane insistence on bilingualism. This cabal runs our political system.

Since so much power in Canada has moved beyond the reach of the electorate, than, it is naive of us to expect an elected leader (Harper or anyone) or party (the CPC) to ALONE be able to solve this crisis. Remember, all that the elected representatives can do- is use the upfront powers of the House. They have no 'reach' elsewhere. They are shackled - and I mean that word.

What to do? It is up to the people of the country to 'take back democracy' in Canada. We have to talk, write MPs, write newspapers, blog, talk, and talk.

Otherwise - it will get worse. We are seeing the phenomena of an utterly corrupt Liberal govt (but it could be any party!!)..beyond the reach of the electorate. And..it will get worse.

Posted by: ET at May 21, 2005 10:02 AM

The only thing worse than a liar and a thief, is a sanctimonious liar and a thief.

I am beginning to think that the only way to save this country is for all conservatives to pretend to be Liberals long enough to get inside the Party, take it over with stealth, and eviscerate it. Maybe that's the hidden agenda, and Belinda is just the first of many.

Posted by: Shaken at May 21, 2005 10:16 AM

Meatpuppet:

I suppose the transient values and fidelity in the lib-left utopian kingdom left you feeling a tad hollow and unfulfilled what with all the superficial "friendship" there....so you sojourn to a world where words mean things and what is promised is a bond...the world of the new right...of rational non compromise.

Fidelity and absolutist ethics..... not used in lib-world any more.

I sense that your need to so vehemently deny the obvious infidelity of the Martin cartel is a telling trait of someone who does not really swallow the partisan dogma fed him. I think you realize that anything Martin promises will never be a reality....we won't see the NDP budget, we won't see an election writ after gomery, we won't see systemic clean up of government or solution to the "democratic deficeit" or western alienation or fractured confederalism. We WILL se an ethically devolved Liberal political cabal cling to power by employing ANY deceit needed.

What we can rely on is the liberal track record of broken promises and hidden agendas.....the only ethics present in the modern Liberal creed is: power for power's sake and at any cost.

There's your Liberal morality right there bucko. But you want so desparately to believe there's more...a higher value..."a greater good"...like the mythological soap the lib spin team wax you useful partisan idiots down with.

Well there isn't more.....and the only way you will placate any sense of higher ethical values is to shed relexive partisanism to a thoroughly debauched ( so-called) Liberal political cartel and their fallacious dogma.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at May 21, 2005 10:22 AM

ET,

Australia definitely has a more accountable system, and it would take almost an uprising here to get that implemented. To do it over time would be difficult as one corrupted element, or attempt to maintain power, would circumvent the process.

WL Mackenzie Redux

Your comment should be in every paper in the county...sadly there, for the most part, against truth.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 10:42 AM

Rob- it wouldn't take an 'uprisiing' (i.e., violent revolution) to implement the Australian or effectively, an entirely elected and accountable political system here. It would take, siimply and only, the will of the people.

We have reached a bifurcation point in Canadian history; a crossroads. Either we continue, as we are, which is downhill into a corruption that is entrenched, that is almost a theocracy in that it assumes a legitimacy merely because it 'is' over time - or - we take back democracy. I mean it; our current situation is as serious as that.

We are economically protected from the results of our political corruption by the fact that we have a constant consumer at our doorstep - the USA. Without that protection - which we denigrate and deride - we'd be like Zimbabwe in a few years - with a dysfunctional economy.

But, make no mistake. Our political system is no longer ours, i.e., we, the people, do not control it. The extent of the patronage infastructure is increasing, as we have seen, to the elected bodies. The current Liberal government is being shown, by the Gomery Inquiry, to be in power due to non-elected and unaccountable actions. That will continue and increase, because as it increases, it silences opposition, silences reason, silences calls for empirical objective evidence.

Our elected Opposition, the CPC, cannot take back democracy on its own, because it is shackled within the requirements of accountability. Unlike the Liberals.

Therefore, it is up to the people of Canada - not to sit back and watch passively but to take active participation. Write MPs, write newspapers, set up more blogs. Blog and blog.

I absolutely reject that inserting democracy into Canada would require a revolution. It requires only the will of a group of people. Once they begin to be heard - the GreyPeople - those middle of the road people whom Kate talks about - The GreyPeople will follow.

Posted by: ET at May 21, 2005 11:27 AM

ET - Agreed, and it would be nice to have a peaceful solution, but history has shown, sometimes violence is necessary to remove dictators, and I'm not necessarily opposed to that if it takes that extreme to restore democracy.

The hardest obstacle to overcome, and the one that will be the biggest challenge and fight, is the representation by population. The challenges to this item in the past have already been rejected a few times. Senate is the best example, AB attempts to put in place elected senators, and there rejected for patronage by the ruling party. That would have been a starting point, but the thirst for power overwhelmed the needs of fairness and accountability.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 12:04 PM

BlueEyes: Sorry, but I'm for SSM and while I'm opposed to the gun registry, I tend to favour compound bows as I've always regarded guns as being the choice of unskilled pussies.

What I have in mind is a propaganda campaign aimed at the Liberal's core constituency that amplifies all of the areas where the Libranos fall down (e.g. Paul Martin's company CSL has a suck ass environmental record while PM the PM himself uses a private physician). The idea would be to drive soft Lib votes over to the NDP or Greens.

I'm a Green supporter myself, but I could live with a less corrupt CPC government in the meantime until the Greens get some traction.

I'm going to drive out to Saskabush for a week this summer and bounce some ideas on this off of Kate after I've had time to firm them up more.

Posted by: Sean at May 21, 2005 12:30 PM

"I am beginning to think that the only way to save this country is for all conservatives to pretend to be Liberals long enough to get inside the Party, take it over with stealth, and eviscerate it."

This approach worked well for Ralph Klein. That pinko b*****d is about as 'Conservative' as Svend Robinson is honest about paying for his purchases. **COUGH ** When you live in a one party state (or province) the best solution is to commandeer the leading party.

Posted by: Sean at May 21, 2005 12:35 PM

The challenges that conservative Canadians face are daunting. And I know from my own political activitsm here in the States how difficult it can be to move a comparatively minor issue into the possibility of reform.

In the US, of course we finally managed to become completely dominant on talk radio. We have Fox News, and there are other instruments that help to keep the conservative agenda viable.

You guys have something we don't have. At least the potential for separation. Here are my thoughts.
1. Alberta, we love you. Join us. We need you to help us deal with the dark forces around the world. You would get at least a 30 percent better deal across the board. Alberta would be great for the US, and the US would be great for Alberta.

However, here's what you could do.
2. Get some of your oil executives in touch with some of our oil executives about the possibility of joining the US. Let our guys take these back-channel converstations back to Bush. Have off-the-record exploratory conversations and iron a lot of things out before you ever go public.

3. Consider becoming a US territory. Then if you liked the US, you could join. If you decided it wasn't for you, you could leave. Meanwhile, while you were a US territory, you could place all the demands that ET so eloquently presents at the doorstep of Ottawa. If they want you back, they have to change all this stuff.

4. If they don't want to change, you become a US state and automatically have a large number of ET's considerations (elected senators and so forth) as automatically part of the deal anyway. What's the matter with leading a 30-35% better life? Worse things have happened.

5. Once you become a state, you can have all of your elected politicians relentlessly carry on a campaign to change Canada for the benefit of all of the friends and family who still suffer under the yoke of the current system. At this juncture, you would not be able to re-join Canada.

So in short, you could use separation as a lever to demand the changes you want from Canada. If you couldn't get those changes, guess what? You're a US state anyway and then you can relentlessly hound them for a better life in the security of US citizenship. You're up against such a daunting challenge I don't see how you're going to be able to move things off square 1 without powerful leverage.

Posted by: Greg at May 21, 2005 1:04 PM

The "Green Party" has been mentioned.

This "party" uses the word green as a cover for its dogma of Communist tyranny.

Not for nothing is the "Green Party" named the watermelon party: Green on the outside; red in the inside. (Search the 'net).

Beware the sweet, succulent, siren-song of the "Green Party".

The "Green Party", as is the NDP, is a natural ally of the Liberal/Socialist Party.


Furthermore, the "Liberal Party" is a socialist party; the National Socialist Party.

Read and listen to ET's message.ET is based here on earth,in Canada, today.

Blog on, ET. Join with ET and blog on.

Posted by: maz2 at May 21, 2005 1:05 PM

Greg,

Exactly, and very well put. Because we don't have the population base, and because the system is based on rep by pop., we have no lever and are considered a bunch of winers.

In any strategy there has to be multiple approaches and responses to the ultimate outcome. The weaker approach generally is squashed by the stronger response.

Your method would deliver a very strong approach which would leave the choice of continuance in the hands of the people that created the problem. That would determine if the rest of the country has the will to even maintain a union, or if there comfortable with the situation there in.

It wouldn't be a struggle for power, it would be a struggle to see if the rest of the country wants a better democracy, or if they want to continue down the path to a socialist state. It's actually a very good solution that would probably include no violence, and the outcome would be determined relativily quickly..

I'll have to compile a list of contacts.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 1:37 PM

ET. I agree with your post of 11.27 AM. But this is not going to happen on the federal level. It can happen in Alberta however. Alberta needs to elect a government that is strong enough to go in this direction on its own. They don't need to threaten anybody about separation. As much as I love America, I love Canada more. Just not the majority of Canadians at the moment. In my opinion this is what Alberta must and can do:

1. Elect a party that is strong enough to go their separate way *in* Canada if necessary.
2. Set up its own provincial police force.
3. Set up its own Health Care program.
4. Withhold all monies going to Ottawa each year for both #2 and 3.
5. Enter into its own agreement with the United States for the sale of oil, beef and grain.
6. Build two additional pipe lines to the United States (not sure these are required though).
7. Kill the Gun Law.
8. Withdraw their support for Kyoto.
9. Invite BC, Saskatchewan and Manitoba to join them and do similar. This doesn't really matter though.
10. Strengthen their provincial courts. Not sure how they can do this but they need to get rid of all the Liberal, queezy, tree-hugging, child-killer loving judges and appoint ones that are more inclined to support the will of the people of Alberta instead of Ontario.
11. Strengthen their sentences for drug trafficking. Life sentences for the big boys.
12. Strengthen its representation in the Senate. Not that the Senate is good for anything though. I say just abolish it.

Then, what Albertans need to do, *if* Ottawa decided to fight Alberta in the courts on any of these issues, and they will, is to withhold all tax payable to Ottawa for as long as the court case lasts. Everyone who voted for this 'New Party' could, together, pay their taxes into an interest bearing account set up in their own name in a local Credit Union. This is important. Don't refuse to pay taxes, but pay them into a holding account in the name of each taxpayer. Is Ottawa going to sue each individual taxpayer? Nope.

Now, can anyone tell me that this won't work? Can anyone tell me that it's too complicated? Can anyone tell me that Albertans lack the intestinal fortitude to pull this off? Trust me. If anyone can pull something like this off it is Alberta. There are more pissed off Albertans today than there are pissed off Quebecers.

All they need is a good plan and a strong provincial government to follow. No threats. No getting mad at anybody. Just action.

Posted by: John Crittenden at May 21, 2005 2:07 PM

Liberal Party Credo:

�Let every Canadian know, whether they wish us well or ill, we shall pay any price, break any law, meet any crook, sellout any friend, bribe any foe, to assure the survival of corruption and Liberal power.� (Apologies to JFK)

To paraphrase Winston Churchill: �Canada had the choice between honesty and corruption. It has chosen corruption now, it will get honesty later.�

Posted by: oltx at May 21, 2005 2:16 PM

John Crittenden,

Yes very viable, but the only party close to those options, currently, is the Separation Party of Alberta, http://separationalberta.com .

If you read through there platform, there saying just about the same thing, accept that they would pursue full separation. If a workable alternative was available, they would probably be open to it. I'll fire your statement off to them and see if I get a response.

Again, this is the big lever Greg was discussing, and leaves 3 outcomes, Stay, Go, Join the US.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 2:24 PM

I like John Crittenden's and Greg's suggestions in part, in part,..and in theory not in practice.

Why not in practice? Because we have to be very careful NOT to lock ourselves into a 'distinct' party, a separate political party that will simply function as That Party with only, and only, Its Members.

I agree with so many of the concepts. Cancel the Gun Registry; get in private health care; withdraw from the Kyoto fiasco; get online with BMD; stronger ties with the US; oh- and get rid of bilingualism; an elected Senate; get rid of the G-G (both the current Incumbent-For-Life and the position); each of the decentralized regions that I've been proposing enters into its own economic agreements...etc.

What I've been proposing is a restructuring of the federation into five or six self-organized economic regions. Quebec, unilingual, is one. Ontario is another. The West is another. BC may be with them.Maritimes is another. Nfld/Labrador may be with them. The North. These are 'regions' rather like States. Self-organized with the major economic, health care, education powers and taxing by and for themselves.

The federal gov't ought to be VASTLY reduced in power (and bureaucracy and taxation)..and runs primarily the 'interconnectional system': post office, transportation, defense. Most key powers get moved to the Regions and out of Ottawa's hands.

An elected Senate. A reduced in numbers Commons.

Now- I don't think that getting together another Party or separate activity is the answer. Why not? Because we'd end up locking ourselves AND our ideas within the party. In order to share our ideas people would feel that they'd have to 'join the party'. They would have to make a choice. That was the downfall of the Reform, the Alliance, and other parties. Don't ask people to make a choice of joining a party. Especially Canadians who have been educated and socialized not to, ever, make any choices. Kate wasn't kidding when she talked about The Grey area. That's Canadian. We call it 'tolerance' but that's rubbish. It's in reality, a head-in-the sands standing back and watching the rest of the world do it all.

I don't think we should establish our ideas, which are really basic democratic principles, into a party or party ideology. Some of these issues, such as SSM, gun registry, health care..are 'political issues' in the sense that they are not infrastructural but are Issues, concepts that a population will either agree or not agree with.

What I'm talking about is deeper than the issues. It's the infrastructure within which we, as a people, can decide for ourselves, our agreement with these issues.

What has been destroyed in this country - is that basic democratic infrastructure. We, the people, no longer have a democracy. We don't have a democratic voice. Decisions are made, not by and for us - but by a small, unelected, unaccountable, self-serving group in Montreal-Ottawa.
Was Iraq a decision made by us or by Chretien?
Kyoto?
BMD?
Health care?
Gun registry?

Is our parliament accountable to us for what it does and how it spends our money? No.

First- let's take back democracy in this country. That means that we have to TALK about the fact that Canada is no longer a democracy but an oligarchy.

I strongly warn against setting up a party, no matter how enticing, no matter how good it might feel to be in a situation where we can speak our minds and not have to listen to others without that attribute.

First- we have to take back democracy. The only way that I can think of doing this - and I'm no seer or sage - is by talking about its loss, both in the specifics and its repair.

Newspaper articles, magazine articles, more and more blogs must be set up. Ignore the mainstream media except to send them, constantly, copies of our blogs and articles. The MSM are withering; they are still there, but they don't have the 'reach-out' power of electronic media.
Send MPs our blogs; send them articles.

More and more blogs and more and more talk. That will, in itself, reach a threshold point when it becomes, no longer marginal but yes, mainstream. I'm serious. I'm using physical and biological principles of organization...(complexity theory when a system reaches a threshold point of energy-organization and 'flips' into a new organization...)..but..it will work.

What we have to do, is articulate a number of key structural points. Not the issues; they come later. The point is, Canadians will listen; and, like 'swarming' in biological systems, they will move closer to The Talk. Closer and closer to the talk; and they will, without realizing it, become part of that talk.

What's the talk?

1) The FACT that Canada is no longer a democracy but an oligarchy; due to its huge percentage of unelected key positions - of Senate, of judges, of CEOs in major positions.
2) The FACT that this unelected patronage system has become corrupt, unaccountable, unanswerable to the people - Gomery, PowerCorp/Desmarais groups and activities - list them. The hidden sums of money in Foundations.
3) The FACT that centralization of powers in Ottawa is an enormous waste of taxpayer money, resulting in a bloated bureaucracy, inefficient services.
4) The FACT that our health care system is a disaster..and requires privatization.
5) The FACT that our population base has increased to a critical level, and our geographic spread requires - a new federalism; namely, decentralization - with vastly increased economic and social powers to go to the Regions and removed from Ottawa.

All I'm suggesting at the moment, is that these concepts should become part of the public 'talk'. Harper and the CPC can't do it all for us. We have to be 'the voices' ..

Posted by: ET at May 21, 2005 2:49 PM

Hey, John, ya big firewallin'lug. Get in touch with Ted Morton.

Posted by: adair at May 21, 2005 2:51 PM

Uh oh... you be in trouble now John

Think they'll pay ya for implementation.... ;-)

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 3:44 PM

Are the PC's in AB starting to get mad:

http://www.tedmorton.ca/speeches/fair_deal/firewalls.html

One can only hope....

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 3:48 PM

Gee, I think I'll spent a bit more than the ten minutes or so that it took to complete my comment of 02:07 PM and get back with something a bit more concrete. I'm sure I left a number of important things off my list. But then I'm only an artist. What the hell to I know?

Well, one thing I do know for sure is that my uncles did not die in WWII for the Canada we now have. I'll repeat a few lines that I posted on another blog a few days ago.

"I went for a hike today. I got out in the bush with my camera, alone for awhile. After a couple hours I stopped for a breather. I sat down and looked around at my country. It is times like this that I realize how beautiful a country Canada is, and how lucky we are to live here. I am proud of Canada. I am. I'm just not proud to *be* a Canadian right now. There's a difference.

"Canada used to be a proud nation. I remember standing in the barnyard outside our farmhouse near Melita, Manitoba in 1942 when I was about three. A squadron of planes passed overhead, on their way to Europe and the war. One of the planes dipped its wings. That was the custom when they flew over a town or city of someone on board. I knew uncle Billy was on that plane. I remember my grandmother crying, not much, but a little.

"I remember when I was about four years old and was in a park in Essex, Ontario during the last year of WWII. The grownups were burning the effigy of Hitler and singing songs. I had already lost two uncles. We didn't know if there would be more.

"These are the reasons why I have no patience. Canada has become irrelevant. I do not understand people who cannot see, and who refuse to understand what is happening to our country.

"Wearing a red flower for one day a year is not enough. Soon there will be no more red flowers...

The fact that so many in Canada are satisfied with incompetence, poor management, corruption, fraud, deceit, corrupt judiciary appointments, electoral fraud, lying, bribery, criminal conspiracies, illiteracy, backstabbing and betrayal in their elected officials makes me think things will not get better for some time. Canada is being run by a backroom group of filthy rich people and criminals who do not care about Canada. The Liberal Party is their means of implementing their programs, all of which are designed to increase their hold on power and make them even richer.

These are the reasons why I think it depends on individual provinces to say enough is enough, and take control of their own destiny. In Canada if possible. If not, well, there are other ways.

Posted by: John Crittenden at May 21, 2005 4:28 PM

John Crittenden,
I have read many of your comments and you always say something that makes perfect sense but has not been articulated mind before. KEY POINT stop arguing with corrupt Liberal/ND frount yappers and default to action -one step at a time.
The Yukon Territory has 29,000 people ; territorial gov't is Conservative (majority -no election for 2 years - this gov't is the direct result of a Lib/ND vote splitting in the last election)Fed gov't is Liberal - Larry Bagnel, Larry does not fake his low IQ. The Yukon was once SOLID Conservative but in 1986 a ND territorial gov't won due to infighting among Conservatives ; as soon as Socialists hit the benches they got Fed pork and we got Gov't workers moved up here to work for the socialists. We also got minnions of environmentalists who shut down mining. Most real Yukoners moved to the USA or to Alberta. Now the territory is 2/3 imported Socialists. Larry Bagnel brings in truckloads of cash to prop up the case for the Socialists and the territorial gov't takes the money and tacitly props up Bagnel. The Conservatives have an uphill battle so we need some Conservative imports to win the next election. The Yukon Party would LOVE to see some production (because they are Conservatives with hands tied), Alta could help - send us some voters for the next election. Put some Companies up here with Alta workers. The Yukon would be a HUGE loss for the Liberals because it is their only stronghold in the west and it is next door to Alaska. With a population of only 29,000 and 1/3 already Conservatives - the table is set - all we need is the Beef.
I just have to tell Kate how much I appreciate her post with references to Ann Rand. Ann is demonized by MSM as heartless, meanspirited ...and so on...she uses a language not easy to understand if a person has never studied philosophy but she did write a book in plain English that spells out the end for people if they continue to allow this Black Reign of Corruption to reach it's goal: Dictatorship of the Prolitariate via Elitist Socialism (there is NO OTHER type of Socialism, something the bleeding heart spokesmen for the Lib/ND brand have brainwashed people to NEVER contemplate). That book is "We,The Living". You can buy it in used book stores or on the net. Keep up the good work all you bloggers who care about the Canadians -the TRUE Canadians- of this country.

Posted by: Jema54 at May 21, 2005 4:34 PM

Sorry ET, I still have to go with John's "I'm just an artist" plan.. ;-)

Reason:
There is to many fundemental differences between east and west, and in talking to people down there, they are comfortable with the way of life, the hand outs, and the patronage. They will not change if they've become accustomed to social dependency until you take it away.

Alberta is already looked at as a bunch of whining bleeding hearts with more money then they know what to do with, and were the annoying little brother that has no rational bases for bitching about anything. All you have to do is read Andrew Coynes comments a few times to realize that the ideology out here is totally different, and it would take a radical shift before anybody would consider or even look at it.

This would also aid in the concerns jema54 is bringing to the table as well.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 5:11 PM

Jema54. I don't live in Alberta at the moment, although I will go back as soon as I feel a strong provincial party needs my vote. I will also go up to your area if that will help. I'm as free as a gypsi now, and can 'go where the action is', so to speak. I guess I'm saying my vote is for sale, but only to the right people of course.

In the meantime I will do what I can to make those around me aware of what is going on. Sorry if I bark too much about the corruption but this is the central problem and can't be ignored. It amazes me how may people I know do not take time to educate themselves before voting. I'm trying to educate a few but it ain't easy.

As for Ayn Rand, I love her writings. Fountainhead was the first I read many years ago. Those were the years when a few of us artists, a couple poets, a Rabbi, and a couple ministers used to meet on a Friday afternoon somewhere in Edmonton or Calgary and talk about things like religion and politics, etc. I think we may have started the sidewalk cafe thing. We did drag our cables out on the sidewalk a few times. Some of us would bring their latest sketches from field trips, some would read a poem or two. We all talked about politics and religion though. We all really thought that we could change the world. Well, it's some 40 years later. Half of us have passed away. And the world may have indeed changed, but it hasn't been for the good in my opinion.

Anyway, back to the present. This is how I see the next election shaping up, given that most or all votes in Quebec will go to the Bloc. Look for Quebec to go 100% for the Bloc next election. The Conservatives will probably stay about where they are. So the Liberals will probably lose some seats but still form a minority government. This is how I see the next government in Ottawa:

Liberal 109
NDP 25
Conservative 96
Bloq 75
Independent 3

I do not think the Liberals want an election at any time right now. The Sponsorship fraud has done it for them, and they know it. They have lost Quebec for good. And, even though many still say they will vote Liberal, I wonder how many will when the time comes and no-one is watching them cast their vote.

The Conservatives now need to make sure that *none* of their MPs are bought out. They made a mistake with Belinda Stronach, who was a plant in my opinion. She must be the last. My fear is that she won't be the last.

Posted by: John Crittenden at May 21, 2005 5:31 PM

jema54,

John and Greg's plan would ultimately encourage change in your area as well. If AB said enough already, no more transfers, it would put the feds in a position were they would have to make up the difference or start cuts. The first to get cut would be special interest groups such as your tree huggers. The people there would start making noise, the prov gov would have to do more to encourage business to gain revenue, and the feds would have to slowly make social programs more efficient, or cut them back. In other words, people would have to put more emphasis on productivity.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 5:36 PM

whoever gave the link to Ted Morton, thanks.

Lots of interesting discussion in here today. We need to attack from both angles, provincially and federally (as someone in here said, Plan B needs to be in place).

We need to email our MLAs about what we want to see put in place, i.e. firewalls. In Alberta, we need Ralph to resign. He's too tired & jaded to do what needs to be done.

Posted by: Candace at May 21, 2005 7:04 PM

Rob,
I don't think that if some poor sucker stood up to Tony and said " Tony I ain't paying you anymore." that Tony would put his hands in his pockets, shrug and say "Ok then." and just trudge off.

Neither would the Libranos. They rob Peter to buy off Paul, while keeping a nice slice for themselves.

Posted by: Cal at May 21, 2005 7:10 PM

This is all far too complicated for me. I'm going to sit down, crack open a Classic Coke and watch the Memorial Cup. I love Junior Hockey. Anyone remember the NHL? Go Kelowna. Oh ya', they don't olay till tomorrow.

Posted by: John Crittenden at May 21, 2005 7:24 PM

Very very good.
I want ask a question though and don't know exactly how these Blogs work. So at the risk of getting hammered for bringing it up in the wrong place here I go. And just for the record these CRIMINALS that are in power now should be in JAIL.
Now for the question:
If the Tory's (which I feel is the only alternative) are really interested in change, why aren't they putting forward (or trying to put forward) laws NOW that would CHANGE the system. If the Lib's didn't support them they (the Lib's) would surely have to expose thier TRUE Colors. Regardless if the Tory's do this or not, the CRIMINALS have to go and the Tory's will get my support to do that. The support that I would give to a Party that was willing to DEFINE "acountable" (would need to inclued words like "independent", "jail time" and so on) and promise some sort of transparancy would be a 1000 FOLD!!!
Anyone else feel this way?
Oh ya, where should I have asked this question?

Posted by: Maybe Later at May 21, 2005 8:02 PM

Sean,

Whether or not you are for or against SSM/gun registry/kyoto is not the point. The point is that these are instances where the creeping spread of Liberal Party policy could have been successfully opposed on the provincial level, but was not.

Posted by: BlueEyes at May 21, 2005 8:06 PM

Cal,

Not if you have everyone in the province doing it, another words, who's to say that we no longer wish to be part of equalization. We've paid way more then our share anyway. If they send in the military etc. etc, then they would have a real problem on there hands, and how do you put 3 mil. people in jail, not to mention the world wide attention.

it's relatively the same thing that's going to happen in quebec, if they have the desire and will to exercise provincial power, there is not to much the feds can do about it if the people of the province are behind it.

Maybe Later, They can't really because there to small at the present time, and the Bloc and NDP won't team up and support conservative issues.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 8:44 PM

"Alberta, we love you. Join us. We need you to help us deal with the dark forces around the world."

I'm interested, Greg. :-)

Posted by: Sean at May 21, 2005 9:58 PM

Rob as someone already mentioned above, here in Alberta we have to get Ralph Klein out first. The second thing we have to do is keep Jim Dinning out and try to get Ted Morton in as leader. Reasons: Dinning is a fiscal conservative but he supported Nancy Betkowski during the last leadership campaign which tells me his conservatism is soft.
The reason we need Ted Morton is because he is so well versed on the Canadian Constitution and knows all the loopholes. He should have been the Justice minister now but Klein always puts in a Red Tory in that portfolio. Secondly he will not take any shit from Ottawa and he is all for the firewall, which also tells me he wont mind playing tough against the Feds. So in my humble opinion when the leadership comes up we have to get out and support Morton.

Posted by: MikeP at May 21, 2005 10:02 PM

"Maybe Later, They can't really because there to small at the present time, and the Bloc and NDP won't team up and support conservative issues."

O.K. You may be right. And likely I'm crazy but, I can't imagine the whole country not jumping on board with just about any Party (Name of Party doesn't matter) that had a simple stratagy (others could do better but something like this).

If given a majority government all will be the same at first but ONE item at a time we WILL:
1) Do a complete audit of the current finances of Canada with the help of an independent auditor (will target 9 months to complete).
2) Will define ethics (would be something that would make us Proud). Stuff like if you are un happy with the party that you belong you could sit as an independent but could not switch parties (ie pretend that your ideals changed overnight). Held at a higher standard then the general public (Need work, I know) (will target 5 months to complete).
3) Define accountability. This would be very clear and inclued criminal proceedings that would be done within 6 months.......
4)5)6)....You know fundamental stuff / structural stuff.

If only given a Minority Government we would do:
...........

Anyway, you see what I'm getting at. That Party would suggest that all things would would remain the same untill one be one these are implemented.

After even begining to read what I've written (which I know is not anywhere complete), I think I see the problem with my approach. I make this huge assumption that ALL will have the same vision of what I would like to see in the mandate (and although we all have different ideas I still think they will, you know basic honesty and transparancy). That's because I'm only really talking about the SET-UP of the way government works. This Party would promise that after 18 months (once the government was restructured) they would have a referendum asking if Canadians wanted to have an election so that they could then pick a New Government (to be run under the new system) and that election would be more about Political Ideals.

Posted by: Maybe at May 21, 2005 10:24 PM

Hey MikeP,

That's assuming he's going to run. He should take the time now to get better known.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 10:33 PM

Wow I was just over at
http://separationalberta.com
and although I don't have time to read all thier stuff right now, none that I did scared me. It looks good!! Even to someone that lives in Ottawa.

Posted by: Maybe at May 21, 2005 10:37 PM

Maybe,

Maybe a little bit ambitious at this point. More focus has to be put on getting the current gov out, and what to do if it fails. Yes, there is a possibility of failure, because central and eastern Canada may not want change. That's were all the statements above come from.

Posted by: rob at May 21, 2005 10:41 PM

""Alberta, we love you. Join us. We need you to help us deal with the dark forces around the world."

I'm interested, Greg. :-)"


Sean, yes. In the US we are for ourselves, just as I am for Texas. However, if you are a politically aware American you realize that you are also called to serve an Ideal. You've heard Bush say time and time again that we are trying to spread liberty around the world. It's messy and full of contradictions, but in the end, that's exactly what we're trying to do.

We know that free people in democracies don't make war on each other. And in the world, the US has a lot of heavy lifting to do. You can see the thanks we receive from the opinions of Europeans.

I think Alberta has more in common with us than Ottawa. I think Alberta would prefer being part of the vast attempt to pursue freedom and peace.

If you become a state in the US, Alberta has a big chip at the table. You'll have to help make the judgements about action or inaction. If you decide to send troops, you will watch them in firefights. Your elected senators and congressmen will vote on it. And you will have put them in office. If you decide to help in a disaster, you'll watch your sons and daughters on the aircraft carriers. You will have helped to put them there.

We need your help. We thought we had Canada's help and found out we were wrong. If you become a state, it means that we trust you with our children. It means that we trust you to make the right decisions about freedom. It's tough, but it's what we're about. I think it's what Alberta's about too.

Posted by: Greg at May 21, 2005 11:17 PM

Gee, that was a good game. I've missed some things here but I'd like to toss out a couple observations.

I think it may be a lot easier than most of us think.

First: I do not think the Liberals will elect a majority government for a long, long time. So, we need to think about what can be accomplished between the Bloc and the Conservatives. They both need to set out their platform SOON so we can see exactly what they stand for, not what they say they stand for. Then we can put some heat on the Conservatives to start making deals with the Bloc. And that can be done, mark my words.

Second: Alberta has to elect a strong provincial government and let the rest of Canada know where we stand. The best way to do this is for Ted Morton (if he's the one) to set out a very specific and strong platform going into the election. Then the election can be looked at as a referendum almost. No smoke and mirrors, just straight talk.

Third: Alberta has to let Ottawa know, regardless of whether it's a Liberal or Conservative minority, that they need to immediately move to address Alberta's concerns. Those mostly include equalization payments, representation, freedom to deal with foreign trade directly (no middle men), get rid of the Gun Law and kill Kyoto for starters. Once this is done Alberta and Ottawa can sit down and discuss what needs to be done to keep Canada together. But, just to put the pressure on, Alberta needs to let Ottawa know that they are beginning discussions about their own police force and medical plan.

If it's a Liberal minority these demands will finally put them on notice that things need to change and quick. If it's a Conservative minority then these demands will give them a lot more clout in making deals with the Bloc to accomplish some of these objectives.

Forget any deals with the NDP.

All Alberta needs to do is stop the flow of money for awhile and Ottawa has two choices, go to court or sit down and work out a deal. For the life of me I don't understand why we haven't done that before. I'm sick of getting mad and I'm sick of putting up with things like the Gun Law and Kyoto (there are more). Whether it's a Liberal or Conservative government our demands should be the same.

If Alberta wants to they can bring this country to its knees.

Posted by: John Crittenden at May 21, 2005 11:26 PM

Greg. Just to let you know, there are a lot of Canadians who supported your war in Iraq. I just wish Bush had given the real reason rather than WMD. I support Bush and I support America. But I am and want to remain a Canadian. It should make no difference to you either way if we become what we were during the two world wars. We were allies. When Ottawa turned her back on Great Britain and America after 9-11 she was not speaking for all of us. There were many of us who were ashamed and still are.

I hope Bush finishes the job he started before leaving office. It was a noble one but there are two more big steps he needs to take.

I won't even get into multiculturalism. That's another disaster that has to change for both of us. But for some reason most everyone who goes the America becomes Americans first and hyphenated second. Up here in Canada it's the other way around, to our detriment.

Posted by: John Crittenden at May 21, 2005 11:41 PM

The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

Edmond Burke

Posted by: rob at May 22, 2005 12:57 AM

John C.,
The war in Iraq (about which, I admit, I had some reservations) was not about oil ... at least not on the part of the USA. It appears that it was about Saddam's oil on the part of those who tried to stop it (including the Desmarais Power Corp mob).
And, sadly, hyphenization disease is more and more a part of US life. It frustrates the hell out of me. The USA liberals condescend to the current immigrants, who are mostly Spanish-speaking. Nobody did that for my great-great-grandparents who came over from Germany; nobody did that for my wife's grandparents, who came from Poland and Ukraine; I could go on and on and on ad nauseam.
It's why most of the posts on my blog (stop by sometime) tend to focus north of the border. I would go too nuclear focusing on the USA left's idiocies.
Free Canada!

Posted by: bob at May 22, 2005 1:52 AM

The resolution the Senate signed off on had something like 64 reasons for approving the war. Thanks to the lawyer influence, there was a lot of blathering and repetition. Boiled down, there were about 7 reasons. WMD's were number 3. And that one wasn't just to get the WMD's, but also to prevent future development.

So why all the talk about WMD's when it was only one part of the issue? Because every time Bush spoke, all he got were "How many WMD's does Saddam have?", "What kind of WMD's does Saddam have" etc questions. If Bush was ever given the opportunity to give all the reasons for going in, they never showed it on TV.

If he had no WMD's, how did he gas all those Kurds? How did the Polish Army manage to come across over a dozen artillery shells containing nerve gas? Saddam had plenty of time to evacuate that stuff to Syria, he apparently missed a few. Why did Iraq try to bribe Blix with $2 million if they had nothing to hide?

Iraq is a big place. We'd been there in the neighborhood of a year before we ran across those MIGs buried in the desert (and if I recall correctly, that was within a mile of one of our headquarters over there - the wind blew away enough sand for a tail to stick out).

Posted by: Jay at May 22, 2005 4:21 AM

"Maybe,
Maybe a little bit ambitious at this point. More focus has to be put on getting the current gov out, and what to do if it fails.
Posted by rob at May 21, 2005 10:41 PM"

I absolutely DISAGREE !!
We MUST change the system !!
All, even the ones that start out pure are eventually corrupt by power, so lead us not into temptation.
We must CHANGE THE RULES or nothing will change regardless of the parties name !!!

Posted by: Maybe at May 22, 2005 7:45 PM

It's soooo simple.
If I am elected with a majority government I WILL (see link below).

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsApr2805.html

Posted by: Maybe at May 22, 2005 7:49 PM

Maybe,

Ok, so we agree to disagree, but based on your second last post, wouldn't the CPC adopting the recommendations in your link as carved in stone be a step in removing the current gov.?

If the CPC were to take the high road, less on the past, more on policies and changes to combat the past, wouldn't it give them the attention needed to succeed.

Now if they run that kind of platform and fail, what then. There still has to be planning for multiple outcomes, as know one knows how deep the nanny state is entrenched. The east seems willing to accept what they call "A little bit of corruption" as a trade off to maintain the current situation.

I obviously don't feel that way, and don't think corruption is acceptable, and am also willing to go to extremes, if it's necessary and would make a difference, to change it, but there has to be a sensible logical approach.

Posted by: rob at May 22, 2005 8:35 PM
Site
Meter