Conservatives
Canada has thrown out its liberals. It tried to cover up its corruption with censorship. Fox News and internet bloggers were censored. The liberals attempted to keep a free flow of information and dissent (speech only) from the public square.
They came close to being a completely socialist state and with censorship, approached communism.
I enjoyed visiting Canada in the 1980s, had not returned, but may now that they have addressed their problem.
posted by Chief RZ @ 25.1.06
19 Comments:
Whoah.
Well, if you had read anything I wrote, you would know that I believed conservative bloggers WON the "blogging war", so to speak, during the election.
To say that Canada was approaching communism is funny... That is, if you were joking... I hope you were joking...
I am glad you got to visit Canada, but I have lived here all my life, and I think your view may be a bit distorted.
It may also benefit you to learn about Canada's history and electoral system. You would have a better understanding of "The Mulroney Years" (8 years of conservative government spanning from the 80's to 90's) and the meaning of "minority government."
I hope you find out lots more about our great country. It has a lot of potential.
Mercuda,
Thanks for you opinion on that. What we heard here is that the last government did just about all it could do to censor bloggers like Communist China has gotten Google to do yesterday.
I have visited Montreal, the Salut area in Ontario and near the Maritimes. Does Gander count?
The Mulroney years may have been difficult. Some in the US could equate them to the 'Bush years'!!
I thought Canadians were, like myself, self-sufficient, honest, and hard working. I felt sorry for them in that these values were being eroded by the "welfare state" of the liberals.
Hooray for Canadians! My hubbie is half Canadian. Now maybe we can stand to visit his family again. lol
I'll admit I don't possess a wealth of knowledge of all things Canada, but I've been reading some Canadian blogs over the last year and many have been at wits end over the level of corruption under the government just handed their minority status.
I'll happily visit mercuda's blog and get his perspective too.
Oyster,
I have been following this on Captain's Quarters and Fox News. Corruption may have been just the straw, the rest may have been socialized medicine and same sex marriage. I have visited there several times and I just can't imagine that the populace would vote for homosexual marriage.
Hey Chief,
I think the first mistake you made was probably the attempt to receive news, let alone news about Canada, on the Fox network! They have you believing Canadian liberals are censoring blogs This just reveals the power of convincability, these massive network news corporations have on people.
It's awfully strange to hear Americans talk about Canada like this, but it sure is interesting.
What is sure is that a vast majority of Canadians are very happy and want to improve "socialized" health care. There is some debate in Canada over purely private clinics being opened, and there is also the option of having different companies compete to provide medical care that would then be paid for by the Canadian government.
In short, socialized medicare is certainly not responsible for the downfall of the Liberal government.
What's more, the Conservative Party has vowed (and many people don't know this) to maintain public health care and improve it by various means. Some say they want to establish "two-tier" health care, where there is a private sector for those who can afford it, and a public sector, for those who can't. The Conservatives deny this logic, but... I dunno...
I will also say that same-sex marriage probably played only a very minor role in the Liberal's downfall. It's just not treated with the same seriousness as it is in the United States, probably because our churches are less powerful and have limited lobbying roles.
Our Conservative Party, far from wanting to outlaw it, are willing to put it to a "free vote" in parliament (which means party members can vote along non-partisan lines). Can you imagine Republicans getting together and saying, "well, lets just vote on it!"?
Our Conservative Party are not necessarily your conservatives; that's the main point here.
Purplehaze--
After a second visit to your site, it appears that you may have embraced communism. Communism is evil. I would be glad to share with you my numerous and diverse news-gathering methods. I may look into more numerous opportunities for documentation. My concern with you and possibly one more person is that you may think that communism is a good thing. I, of course would agree, but for maybe 7% of the proletariat. The rest would be slaves, tortured, murdered, or starved.
Anyone out there from Canada who can add to this with personal information?
mercuda--
Thanks for the insite from your perspective.
Where do you live?
What party did you back in the last election?
Church affiliation?
Married, children?
We did vote on the homosexual question in the last election. In 11 states, they defined marriage as one man and one woman.
Were you, or any of your neighbors allowed to see Fox News last year?
I agree, the definition of Conservatives, liberals, murder, life in prison, work, and many other words have many meanings.
I do have trouble with some describing those who "can't afford it". A person should be able to work, save money, and buy a car, house, education, a coat, health insurance, vacations--or not. What is your philosophy on work and free choices?
Z-
Please define your use of the mathematic term hyperbolic in this sentence. Have you been to Bangladesh? Please answer at least the minimum of questions I have posted about before I continue conversing with you so we don't waste time.
How old are you?
Where were you born?
What is your level of education, degrees?
I live, and have lived in the free country of the USA for 58 years.
Corruptions are not logical parts of a normal society, every person falls short. Communists intentionally corrupt and lie constantly.
Republicans have a, I can say, a higher moral standard than the recently defeated liberal democarts. One salient example I will site, and then wait for your answers before I will post any more of your comments was a fairly senior US senator from a mid-western state. He divorced his wife and took a younger one. He was not re-elected. The Republicans do not support immoral, felons, liars, or people who cheat on their wives. One more, just to drive home the point: About 5 years ago, a Repulbican speaker of the house resigned before completely taking office because there was some hint that he had an immoral relationship. In the USA, we express our free speech also by voting for our representatives in a secret ballot every 2/4 years.
mercuda--
I have been a bit busy. Now I have some questions for you: Does Canada have a TV system like Britain where there is BT 1,2,3,4, and no other commercial systems may apply?
Second, It may be worse than I thought. Were you saying that one, two or three people can not get together and "form" a clinic, Dr. office or small hospital by themselves, apart from the Canadian federal goverment? They would be free to accept, or not, people who want "free" care.
Fianlly, was the recent liberal government for or against gun ownership, legal defense of one's home for law-abiding citizens (subjects in Canada?)?
I may take my "blogger" status and make some random phone calls to ordinary people in Canada to get a more balanced view of the situation there.
I was in Canada last year running flatbeds. The border stations didn't like my American flag behind my passenger seat- I spent alot of time waiting for "clearance" that the company had already gotten.
For some reason Canada reminds me of the America I grew-up in. It's 2006 and it looks like the 60's.
kurt p-
Thank you for the visit and your frank feedback. I hope to get more like this from experienced, working people who tell The Truth.
You asked: "mercuda--
Where do you live?
What party did you back in the last election?
Church affiliation?
Married, children?"
Canada, none, none, not telling, not telling.
"mercuda"-
Thanks. fair, fair, OK, OK. Privacy is OK.
The reason for the party vote was to help in communication on this subject. The other questions were for the same reasons. People change their views with the last two situations.
May I ask where in Canada--like the province or nearest town/city. My information is available on my profile view.
Thanks again for your truthfulness.
Ontario.
Thanks. Two people who have been struggling just got their income tax refunds. Thanks to President Bush's tax cuts to our working middle and lower middle classes, they now see the fruits of their efforts. This is true freedom. Anyone can make it if they have integrity and an honest work ethic.
What if you have integrity and an honest work ethic, but you're a single mother raising two kids? What are the chances your hard work will pay off?
What are the chances of your having integrity and a good work ethic if you were raised by parents who did not promote this? At what point is it the state's responsibility to step in?
Tax cuts are nice, but they put money directly into the pockets of real people, who now have no control over what to do with that money collectively. What if that money was held by the state, and legislators elected by the people were left to prioritize where it is best spent? What necessarily makes one more effective tha the other?
The same people who argue against welfare spending tell us we need tax cuts, which gives people the freedom to spend cash however they wish... sometimes not so wisely. Why the love of tax cuts over collective decision making and prioritizing?
mercuda--I can answer that. I have several friends in that category. They pass their integrity to their children who, hopefully stay off drugs and learn from mistakes. That alone saves tens of thousands of dollars, and again, I can attest to that. The chances that honest work will pay off are great. I can again, attest to that. I and most of my friends are in that category. Some only have a HS education also. On your last part about the parents who did not promote this...again, not just from personal knowledge of this, but from around 10,000 or so students who I taught, the ones who survived had some of the most "poor" in money, but rich in integrity and ethics. They were happy, and had their self-concept well defined. The state must step in when the parent(s) are irresponsible. Some gross examples I have had personal knowledge of are: prostituting their children to men and women, using their age (under 16) to sell drugs so they wouldn't risk jail time, incest, actual physical neglect. This one really "hurt" me: The parents didn't allow their 6th grader in the house. He told me he had to run through the house, grab some bread and hide under another house. He was placed in a church-type home a month later.
Tax cuts really mean that the government stops taking so much of our hard-earned money so we can decide what to do with it. Again, personal responsibility. You got my attention with the word collectively. Please explain. Each person or family is or should be individualy or family responsible for their own "welfare". The problem with your suggestion that the legislators prioritize where it is best spent is like telling me I am too stupid to manage and budget my own resources. Do I have to ask the legislature when I can take a vacation? What job to take? What car to buy? What home to live in and where? You get the point. The point of freedom is that each person gets to decide for themselves. Otherwise, we are not free. I am enjoying this. Please continue.
Post a Comment
<< Home