19 Replies to “Les conservateurs et le franco-porc noir”
Preston Manning said that when “good people” get elected and move to Ottawa, they become “Ottawashed”.
I believe that this then becomes the gradual decline that then brings about their election defeat and their replacement by parties that don’t even start out with “good people”.
Would rather see a backbench revolt over corporate welfare, twenty five billion dollar deficits, and affirmative action than abortion. Seriously, there’s like 12 vizmin francophone women in all of Toronto, and they each hate Harper – what’s the point?
This really p!sses me off. As an immigrant, I think Canada has given myself and my family more than enough already. It gave us a place to achieve. WHAT MORE IS NEEDED?????????
Seriously, most of the countries from where we’re from don’t give their NATIVE BORN citizens what Canadian immigrants receive! We come here with a promise that we won’t burden the Country, that we have valuble contributions to give, that we will be good friends and neighbours. At least that promise was made when we were allowed in.
Somewhere along the line Canada truely fluffed up. Rather than have us be responsible for ourselves you have decided to further buy our loyalty. At the expense of your own people.
If we needed that help why the heck did you let us in in the first place??????? Did the authorities pre-know we couldn’t take care of ourselves.
In closing, if Canadians don’t want to be treated as the world’s door mat, then the responsibility of change lies with those Canadians who idealize their self-worth by acting like one.
PS… this does not apply to refugees, those who need a helping hand, but to immigrants such as myself.
Does anybody think that maybe it’s high time that Ministers start thinking a bit about what their roles should be?
“Let me see…should I control the bureaucrats in my ministry, or, should I just accept the status quo and let them piss away more taxpayers’ money?”
But, not like the NDP or the Liberals or going to raise a fuss, eh? So the question is answered.
Jeff, well said, great question, and I agree with “Somewhere along the line Canada truly fluffed up. Rather than have us be responsible for ourselves you have decided to further buy our loyalty.”
In the 1920s, when my grandparents came here as refugees, they received no federal government assistance of any sort and in the case of my family paid for their ship and rail fare from Riga to Winnipeg. Their fellow refugees with no or not enough funds owed a debt to Canadian Pacific for both the ship and rail fares. They had to promise not to be a burden on the government and had to have sponsors.
It is ironic that the theory of “white privilege” is a first world notion…resulting in reverse discrimination.
In the 3rd world it is not…in fact 3rd worlders ready commision white contractors to manage their resource extraction and infrastructure and to command their “security forces”. Your “long nose” is your resume.
Tain’t right, tain’t wrong, just is……..
Red Jeff: ” … most of the countries from where we’re from don’t give their NATIVE BORN citizens what Canadian immigrants receive!”
Hey, Red Jeff, I’ve got news for you! Our federal and provincial governments don’t give NATIVE-BORN Canadians what Canadian immigrants receive!
I’m a seventh-generation Canadian whose forebears were instrumental in building this country into one of the most liberal — in the good sense — and democratic countries in the world. My family has no benefits from the government, except our franchise to vote and participate in the democratic process. Our rent, medical and dental bills, educational costs, and day-to-day expenses are solely our responsibility — unlike many immigrants’ expenses, many of whom today never become useful, contributing members of our society: Why would they when our governments so lavishly support them and never wean them off the public teat?
This government support — meaning we pay — for this tiny smidgeon of a demographic — visible minority francophone females (aren’t visible minorities already shoved to the head of the employment line?) — is reprehensible. Rona Ambrose needs her head read; maybe with all that hair, her reasoning faculties have been overtaxed. We, non-visible-minority francophone females, sure have been.
Us’n immigrants of yesteryear brought one very valuble thing with us, work ethic. Today liberals encourage those who have NO work ethic, as it is easier to turn them into Liberal voters.
Stephen Harper …. it’s time to get out those gags and handcuffs again.
Did somebody say “party whips” ?
But seriously …. what happened the the extreme right wing control freak?
No … seriously. This is party policy?
Or is it just the natural outcome of having a ministerial position titled “Minister for Status of Women”…..?
But seriously …. what happened the the extreme right wing control freak?
They never existed. Those whips and gags are used to keep the party members in line and Bigger Blue Government is that line. I hope you’re proud.
The backbench unrest over abortion makes me uneasy but I’ll take anything that makes Father Steve discomforted.
Most of the CPC spending the last few years has mr puzzeled and wondering if these are really fiscal conservatives. It’s obvious they are gutless and scared of the media, senior bureaucrats, police politicos and lefty NGOs – what have we gained politically?
Rona Ambrose is in no way a Conservative and never has been. She showed that with her failed boondoggle Port Alberta.
Occam “what have we gained politically?”
Not a hell of a lot. I find the fact that CBC wasn’t killed in the first majority budget to be atrocious. Harper has thrown us a few symbolic things but Chretien was fiscally more Conservative than the spendthrift Harper. Why is that? I vote for someone more conservative than Chretien and I get someone who spends more than Trudeau.
How exactly does free money teach leadership? Handouts teach dependency and foster a misbegotten sense of entitlement.
Feminists eventually subvert every group they penetrate.
This is great news because if there are any groups completely marginalised in this country, it’s francophones and visible minorities.
Well, before everybody gets their knickers in a twist — already too late, apparently — over Rona (what’s 200 grand?) Ambrose’s foray into Toronto bilingualism, have a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Canadian_federal_budget
and then scroll forward at the box on the right, as indicated. (In this connection, I’d ask you to recall John Diefenbaker’s take on “C.D. (what’s a million?) Howe” — and that was almost sixty years ago now.)
By my calculation, the Liberals increased spending from $171 billion to $209 billion in their last four years in office (there is no earlier information provided, but I’m still curious) — 22.2%, or an arithmetical average of 5.55% per year, when everything was hunky-dory, peachy-keen rosy.
On the basis of a similar calculation, the Conservatives will have increased spending in their first eight years in office from $209 billion to $280 billion — 34%, or an arithmetical average of 4.25% per year, more than half of which came during the financial crisis and ensuing recession (2008-2010) and during which time they have had to refinance the Canadian Armed Forces. In this connection, I seem to recall something about an election which returned an increased minority government, a coalition thingee, opposition demands for “stimulus” (Scott Brison’s name rings a bell, here — something about Stephen Harper having the “policies of George W. Bush and the ethics of Richard Nixon”, or something), blah, blah, blah.
Besides which, 200 grand will barely pay the salary and benefits for one year of one of them brand spanking new 30 MPs that will have to fit in the House of Commons after 2015.
I’m not real happy with Ms. Ambrose’s move, either — or about an expenditure growth rate two or three times the rate of inflation. I would suggest, however, that perspective is helpful. Or something.
I would suggest, however, that perspective is helpful. Or something.
Okay. This 200,000 dollars is just a drop in the failbucket that has been CPC governance. they have had to refinance the Canadian Armed Forces.
They’re cutting the armed forces and using what’s left to fund and nurture a parasitic Military-Industrial complex Canada Edition with preferential contracts for domestic arms producers.
Well, on rebuttal, it rather seems to me that the Chretien/Martin government, in 1997, put something like $100 million into research and development for the F-35 (what’s a hundred million?) to, you know, secure the military-industrial complex benefits (nose cones, or something, like we did on the F-18).
Yet, I still read snuff like, despite the $16 orange juice, and all that, the remaining Liberals in the Senate still outspend the Conservatives by six or seven to one with regard to travel expenses, versus occupancy expenses.
Oh, and by the way, where are ARE the missing millions from the Sponsorship scandal?
Preston Manning said that when “good people” get elected and move to Ottawa, they become “Ottawashed”.
I believe that this then becomes the gradual decline that then brings about their election defeat and their replacement by parties that don’t even start out with “good people”.
Would rather see a backbench revolt over corporate welfare, twenty five billion dollar deficits, and affirmative action than abortion. Seriously, there’s like 12 vizmin francophone women in all of Toronto, and they each hate Harper – what’s the point?
This really p!sses me off. As an immigrant, I think Canada has given myself and my family more than enough already. It gave us a place to achieve. WHAT MORE IS NEEDED?????????
Seriously, most of the countries from where we’re from don’t give their NATIVE BORN citizens what Canadian immigrants receive! We come here with a promise that we won’t burden the Country, that we have valuble contributions to give, that we will be good friends and neighbours. At least that promise was made when we were allowed in.
Somewhere along the line Canada truely fluffed up. Rather than have us be responsible for ourselves you have decided to further buy our loyalty. At the expense of your own people.
If we needed that help why the heck did you let us in in the first place??????? Did the authorities pre-know we couldn’t take care of ourselves.
In closing, if Canadians don’t want to be treated as the world’s door mat, then the responsibility of change lies with those Canadians who idealize their self-worth by acting like one.
PS… this does not apply to refugees, those who need a helping hand, but to immigrants such as myself.
Does anybody think that maybe it’s high time that Ministers start thinking a bit about what their roles should be?
“Let me see…should I control the bureaucrats in my ministry, or, should I just accept the status quo and let them piss away more taxpayers’ money?”
But, not like the NDP or the Liberals or going to raise a fuss, eh? So the question is answered.
Jeff, well said, great question, and I agree with “Somewhere along the line Canada truly fluffed up. Rather than have us be responsible for ourselves you have decided to further buy our loyalty.”
In the 1920s, when my grandparents came here as refugees, they received no federal government assistance of any sort and in the case of my family paid for their ship and rail fare from Riga to Winnipeg. Their fellow refugees with no or not enough funds owed a debt to Canadian Pacific for both the ship and rail fares. They had to promise not to be a burden on the government and had to have sponsors.
It is ironic that the theory of “white privilege” is a first world notion…resulting in reverse discrimination.
In the 3rd world it is not…in fact 3rd worlders ready commision white contractors to manage their resource extraction and infrastructure and to command their “security forces”. Your “long nose” is your resume.
Tain’t right, tain’t wrong, just is……..
Red Jeff: ” … most of the countries from where we’re from don’t give their NATIVE BORN citizens what Canadian immigrants receive!”
Hey, Red Jeff, I’ve got news for you! Our federal and provincial governments don’t give NATIVE-BORN Canadians what Canadian immigrants receive!
I’m a seventh-generation Canadian whose forebears were instrumental in building this country into one of the most liberal — in the good sense — and democratic countries in the world. My family has no benefits from the government, except our franchise to vote and participate in the democratic process. Our rent, medical and dental bills, educational costs, and day-to-day expenses are solely our responsibility — unlike many immigrants’ expenses, many of whom today never become useful, contributing members of our society: Why would they when our governments so lavishly support them and never wean them off the public teat?
This government support — meaning we pay — for this tiny smidgeon of a demographic — visible minority francophone females (aren’t visible minorities already shoved to the head of the employment line?) — is reprehensible. Rona Ambrose needs her head read; maybe with all that hair, her reasoning faculties have been overtaxed.
We, non-visible-minority francophone females, sure have been.
Us’n immigrants of yesteryear brought one very valuble thing with us, work ethic. Today liberals encourage those who have NO work ethic, as it is easier to turn them into Liberal voters.
Stephen Harper …. it’s time to get out those gags and handcuffs again.
Did somebody say “party whips” ?
But seriously …. what happened the the extreme right wing control freak?
No … seriously. This is party policy?
Or is it just the natural outcome of having a ministerial position titled “Minister for Status of Women”…..?
But seriously …. what happened the the extreme right wing control freak?
They never existed. Those whips and gags are used to keep the party members in line and Bigger Blue Government is that line. I hope you’re proud.
The backbench unrest over abortion makes me uneasy but I’ll take anything that makes Father Steve discomforted.
Most of the CPC spending the last few years has mr puzzeled and wondering if these are really fiscal conservatives. It’s obvious they are gutless and scared of the media, senior bureaucrats, police politicos and lefty NGOs – what have we gained politically?
Rona Ambrose is in no way a Conservative and never has been. She showed that with her failed boondoggle Port Alberta.
Occam “what have we gained politically?”
Not a hell of a lot. I find the fact that CBC wasn’t killed in the first majority budget to be atrocious. Harper has thrown us a few symbolic things but Chretien was fiscally more Conservative than the spendthrift Harper. Why is that? I vote for someone more conservative than Chretien and I get someone who spends more than Trudeau.
How exactly does free money teach leadership? Handouts teach dependency and foster a misbegotten sense of entitlement.
Feminists eventually subvert every group they penetrate.
This is great news because if there are any groups completely marginalised in this country, it’s francophones and visible minorities.
Well, before everybody gets their knickers in a twist — already too late, apparently — over Rona (what’s 200 grand?) Ambrose’s foray into Toronto bilingualism, have a look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Canadian_federal_budget
and then scroll forward at the box on the right, as indicated. (In this connection, I’d ask you to recall John Diefenbaker’s take on “C.D. (what’s a million?) Howe” — and that was almost sixty years ago now.)
By my calculation, the Liberals increased spending from $171 billion to $209 billion in their last four years in office (there is no earlier information provided, but I’m still curious) — 22.2%, or an arithmetical average of 5.55% per year, when everything was hunky-dory, peachy-keen rosy.
On the basis of a similar calculation, the Conservatives will have increased spending in their first eight years in office from $209 billion to $280 billion — 34%, or an arithmetical average of 4.25% per year, more than half of which came during the financial crisis and ensuing recession (2008-2010) and during which time they have had to refinance the Canadian Armed Forces. In this connection, I seem to recall something about an election which returned an increased minority government, a coalition thingee, opposition demands for “stimulus” (Scott Brison’s name rings a bell, here — something about Stephen Harper having the “policies of George W. Bush and the ethics of Richard Nixon”, or something), blah, blah, blah.
Besides which, 200 grand will barely pay the salary and benefits for one year of one of them brand spanking new 30 MPs that will have to fit in the House of Commons after 2015.
I’m not real happy with Ms. Ambrose’s move, either — or about an expenditure growth rate two or three times the rate of inflation. I would suggest, however, that perspective is helpful. Or something.
I would suggest, however, that perspective is helpful. Or something.
Okay. This 200,000 dollars is just a drop in the failbucket that has been CPC governance.
they have had to refinance the Canadian Armed Forces.
They’re cutting the armed forces and using what’s left to fund and nurture a parasitic Military-Industrial complex Canada Edition with preferential contracts for domestic arms producers.
Well, on rebuttal, it rather seems to me that the Chretien/Martin government, in 1997, put something like $100 million into research and development for the F-35 (what’s a hundred million?) to, you know, secure the military-industrial complex benefits (nose cones, or something, like we did on the F-18).
Yet, I still read snuff like, despite the $16 orange juice, and all that, the remaining Liberals in the Senate still outspend the Conservatives by six or seven to one with regard to travel expenses, versus occupancy expenses.
Oh, and by the way, where are ARE the missing millions from the Sponsorship scandal?