Talking point on Senate reform
The libs bitch about senate appointments. We can now presume that the LPC policy is that the Senate needs reform.
Please indicate which is liberal policy:
- An LPC government would pursue constitutional reform and will meet with the premier's in a lockup until they cave and signed on. (like Meech with the same resounding success)
- A liberal government will create a working group to travel across the country consulting Canadians after which a group of experts will publish a HUGE document that voters will get to vote on. (like Charlottetown, same success rate as above).
- The liberal party favours the dynamic approach that the current government has choosen (but the liberal dominated senate has refused to pass three times).
- The LPC really has no policy on senate reform. The liberals are just mad that they didn't get to appoint liberal partisan's and cronies to senate seats.
Labels: beer and popcorn
Liberal party is out to lunch...still
These guys obviously have not adjusted to the outcome of the last two elections.
Everybody has been screaming to them to present some policy, and in response they talk about generalities and fall back on the "scary Harper" (tm).
I've seen this script before, let me tell you about one of the first times.
In primary school around grade five, the class gets a visit from the primary school guidance councillor. Now if you haven't encountered this individual before (lucky you) I'll present a perspective to give you an idea. Generally speaking they have a world view that to be kind is described as highly idealistic. They tended to mimic all the Trudeaupian drivel that was fashionable at the time and expound on generalities, but rarely gave any guidance. Point was that, when kids are that age they tend to be impressionable and we didn't have the internet around to fact check as quickly as we should have.
But I digress.
Ms. "Happy-cheery" would dazzle us with some great sounding thoughts about how wonderfully successful everyone would become if we all just got a university degree....never talked about who was going to shovel the excrement or keep the plumbing working, because that was for the "trades" and well...it wasn't as well paying as the "careers" university grads could get.
What was missing from Happy-cheery's pep talk was the pertinent details....like was there a down side to any of this. Perhaps a bit of perspective about the working hours if you became the entry level guy in the engineering department? No? Or perhaps that niggling little detail that doctors don't just deliver babies they also oversee the end of life as well and have to deliver bad news. Of course never having had to perform any actual work...except maybe that stint as bar staff at the student pub...these folks that where now tasked with helping young minds think about what comes after school never really talked about the fact that after school comes work, paying for the things that we take for granted (home, food, clothes, taxes), and about the most important fact that life is not, and never will be fair.
In their mind, life was suppose to be their version of fair.
But back to the good ol L P C.
This is the same type of social engineers that used to go from school to school telling youngsters that everything in life came "no money down because your education is paid by the government" so don't think about it.
The problem with the great schemes is that money doesn't just fall out of the sky, and even university grad's pay taxes...nor do they work for free (which by the way includes doctors so that means health care is never free...another story for another time).
So if the liberals want to be so kind as to divulge how they intend on paying for the grand scheme other than finding more unique ways to dig into Canadians pockets (carbon tax?)they should be honest enough to say so. At this point its either they have no idea and they are just throwing out terms to see what sticks or they do know and won't tell.
Not doing so does allow one thing to happen.
The other parties will fill in the blanks, that you can take to the bank.
Here's what we do know.
Iggy will agree to a coalition with the Bloc if it means forming a government.
He will implement a carbon tax, but won't campaign on it.
They will punish the oil sands with punitive taxes (NEP II). They may want to duct tape Mark Holland's mouth asap.
They will never tell us which 12 riding's in Quebec got the dirty money.
I threw that last one in after Leblanc started talking about how the liberals want to bring in legislation to fight white collar crime. Pot, meet Kettle, Kettle meet Pot.
Ironic in that Leblanc used to work in Chretien's inner circle isn't it?
Lastly, it would also be helpful if they did something about Kinsella....well actually as a conservative I hope they don't...as he is a liability that will take the libs off message. And if there are as many in the LPC that hold a grudge against him for "helping" Bucky Dither's for losing the government side of the house, ditching him asap is the only advise that makes sense....but please don't as I really do want a conservative majority.
In closing. I find in highly unlikely this advise will be heeded, much less read, due mostly to the fact that the traffic here is light to non-existent. It would only be by luck that it gets read at all, greater long odds that the hypothetical reader is of the left persuasion.
So unless you libs want to invoke a wave of scripted ridicule, you may want to provide details about how you want to make us the most well educated country, without the constitution being violated education being a provincial jurisdiction and all.
Frankly though I've seen this script before, it was BS before and its BS now.
Get new ideas or get lost.
BTW
I'll throw one "bone" to the dogs. Come the next election one question will be asked that will hit the opposition like a well placed kick to the crotch.
Does the treasury as it is currently sufficiently funded to pay for your plan?
Will you have to raise taxes?
Will you be cutting funding, and on what program?
And if the treasury is currently in good condition, what does that say about your claims about the current governments handling of the government finances? If you claim the treasury in in bad shape, tell me what program gets cut or what taxes get raised.
Its that simple, all it requires is to divulge the details of your plan.
Don't tell us and you guys wear the scary secret agenda label.
Labels: Conservative majority
Things are getting better
Anyone else get the same idea when they heard Bill Clinton went to N Korea to pick up two asian ladies....and he did not have sexual relations with those two women.
How about how pissed Hillary got when some interpreter got a question wrong and asked what she thought her husband was thinking? Yep, two a.m. and the phone rings, who do you want answering it?
And later this week, the NDP will ditch the new from their party name and run Democrat candidates. This little tid-bit is getting some guffaws but as we all know how the lib-left in this country is all ga-ga over the US party of the same name and by extention its President, the chances that Jack will try to have a pic with him and the O so as to confuse the voters will have an impact on that demographic. Odds are it will get the libs in a fighting mood to make sure the name change doesn't poach some of the same voters they where going to try the same thing on.
Lastly, Harper is setting Iggy up just like he set up Dion. Throw out a debate in parliament that divides the liberal caucus between the blu-libs and the leftwing kook fringe that worships Trudeau ( that would be the Chretien-Martin divide).
Last time it was extending the Afghan mission the liberals sent us on, this time its to fix the refugee process the libs created.
Oppose it because they don't want it changed, or admit its broken and vote with the government. The DP and the Bloc will be voting agianst, that leaves Iggy ready to be tarred with the coalition moniker, or the guy that is afraid of an election.
Labels: beer and popcorn
