said by Tenar :

I at least congratulate Harper on having the longest running minority government. It shows that he can work with other parties.

said by vintagewino :


As Tenar said, Thank you for bringing this back on topic.

It is very interesting to note Harper dropped this little surprise (?) AFTER the advanced polls closed.

In checking Michael Geist's site, it is very interesting to see that NO CONSERVATIVE REPRESENTATIVES have placed their name on the list against C61 or its permutations. This is the typical Harper muzzling his MP's to make certain they tow his desires.

This governing party has the utmost disdain for the voting electorate, and an absolute adoration for the board room and US copyright advocates.

Although there may be a possibility of jeopardizing your candidate of your choice, it might be an idea to vote strategically. see: »www.voteforenvironment.ca/

Unfortunately, I have to abandon my candidate of choice, but for the greater Good ...

What I would like to see is a deadlock between the 3 major parties, with the Cons having one (1) more. Would make for an interesting Parliament. if the government would be defeated quickly, the Governor-general can ask the other parties to form a coalition.

said by in topic :

the CONServative platform is out.

They are bringin back C-61 in all its glory.
»conservative.ca/media/20081007-P···rm-e.pdf

Conservatives Promise to Re-Introduce Canadian DMCA
»www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3439/125/

said by in topic :

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel,_Pa···_Nations
==============

In other news in-topic...

the CONServative platform is out.

They are bringin back C-61 in all its glory.
»conservative.ca/media/20081007-P···rm-e.pdf

Conservatives Promise to Re-Introduce Canadian DMCA
»www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3439/125/

said by jfmezei :

Just a quick note: In my previous post, I did not intend to portray Palestine as innocent and Israel guilty.

One needs to look at a real path forwards. Israel is the more powerful and more civilised one and the sad fact is that it is the one that has the ability to set peace in motion by stopping the actions which motivate the palestinians acts against israel, and be able to take hits without retaliation for long enough for peace to take root.

Signing a deal with a young unstructured country and then killing the deal as soon as there is one act from that country israel doesn't like will never achieve peace. Palestine is like a kid. It takes a while to teach it to behave and during this time, parents have to tolerate the kid misbehaving now and then.

I once listened to a live speech broadcasted by Amadinajad of Iran. It was not "sound byted", and there was live translation. It was quite different from the sound bytes provided by USA media. In essence, he complains that the israel governmnet is illegal and should be destroyed (the governmnet, not the country) because the governmnet was formed by the USA/west without any consultation with the neighbours/middle east and is thus not legitimate.

Imagine if the UN were to decide that the USA state of Missouri were to be handed over to a group of muslims from Kosovo because they were persecuted there and need a safe place to live, and a new country called MisKovo were created with its own independant governmnet, and the USA no longer having that geography as part of its territory. How would the USA react ?

That is how Israel was created. The west took a piece of land and created a new country called Israel and then shipped jewish people from all over the world to populate it, without consulting middle east countries.

said by fier :

Why blow yourself up when the jews get free missles from the US? Although it may not be right, all Palestinian's have is home made bombs and rocks to defend themselves. They're both to blame. Palestinian's will blow themselves up and kill a few people. A few minutes later Israeli's will bomb Palestine and kill 10x the amount of civilians.

Time to scroll up and see why it even came down to this talk.

said by sgfan :

He's a very well known broadcaster for TVO, Ontario's public broadcaster, which is seen throughout the province. He has his own current affairs show "The Agenda with Steve Paikin" on the station.

said by jfmezei :


QUESTION: for the english debate, who was the moderator ? Did they pick some random JQ Pulic person ? Or is that guy some well known broadcaster somewhere in Canada ?

said by jfmezei :

It was painful trying to listen to Dion and Duceppe in the english debate. It looked painful to watch Dion try to speak english. It reminded me a bit of some indian trying to speak english in a distant call centre :-) :-)

The networks should have provided a live translation in understandable english of Dion's arguments :-)

Duceppe is a very good debater in french and brings up good points and valid attacks. It is a shame that his english is so difficult.

I found Elizabeth May to be very good in the debate and provided a much needed fresh face who was not affraid to provide facts, ideas and arguments. Her french was far more understandable than Dion's attempt at speaking english.

It is a shame that nobody brought the issue of network neutrality up.

said by dpkform :

You left out the part where I said selfish is not a put down - I stated I was referring to people placing greater value on their private space.

I do have to wonder about the part where you say "you don't even know your neighbors nor even care to". If that's how you felt, no wonder you moved out of the city - but that attitude is the complete opposite of the norm. You don't see many privacy fences around here - we like seeing and talking to each other when out in our yards.

Anyone who lives in my area, could sell their house today, and purchase 3 equivalent homes in the suburbs with the proceeds - we don't live like this because we can't afford something else. We choose to live here, and we're certainly not living off government handouts.

Toronto sends out $40 billion - that's 40,000,000,000 in tax dollars every year that never comes back. This is a problem for communities across Canada, as higher level governments neglect community infrastructures.

said by tertech :

Wow, now we're 'selfish' because we live in a rural area? Actually I would say that people in rural areas are more self-sufficient and don't rely on the government to provide every single service to them; therefore they resent seeing their tax dollars go to subsidize those services in urban areas and see nothing coming back to their own neighborhoods. As far as a sense of community - it's just as strong in rural areas if not stronger. Crowding a bunch of people into a small area doesn't create a community spirit, it could even create an adversarial survival-of-the-fittest attitude when you're all competing for a limited space. Many city dwellers live so close together because they have no other choice due to their economic situation; they have to live in apartments and take public transit because they can't afford a house or car. Oh, and I grew up in N.Y.C.; don't try to tell me North American cities core neighborhoods are all happy friendly community places. For the most part you don't even know your neighbors and don't even care to.

said by dpkform :

It's too bad this country is so divided and partisan these days. Though living in an urban, close neighbourhood city like Toronto, I understand the more left leaning. People who live in the city tend literally to be much closer with their neighbors and be stronger believers in community. If not - they would not live so close together. People in the suburbs and the country, tend to be more individualist - to place more value on their private spaces - which is more in tune with the right wing philosphy which is more selfish. Of course I am generalizing here, and I'm not using the word selfish as a put-down. This seems to hold true in truly urban (tight core neigbourhoods) style cities throughout North America. Also explains why you are more likely to have your neighbour bring you brownies in the city, than in the suburbs :)

said by Tenar :

(i.e. guerilla marketing - paid posts by con party)
But the Star? I highly disagree there. The Toronto Star is a very socialist paper. If you said the National Post I'd agree more. They are far more on the right, especially in editorials.

said by Tenar :

The financial difficulties in the states are rather complicated. As I have understood the problem, It was the government that encouraged the banks to lend risky mortgage's so more lower class Americans could own homes. When those people could not pay, the banks came to government to collect.

said by Tenar :

Funny, I live in Midland and I only see CON signs =P
LOL
I really think there is a huge difference between rural and urban Canada. Even in the states the rural communities are on the right and urban centers on the left. Bizarre at times.

said by tertech :

I am evil! At least if you believe the platform of the Liberals, NDP, and Greens. They think that I should pay way more for everything I use and will give a tax break to "low and middle income" families to offset their additional costs. Screw me, evil bastard, I don't fit in that category.
...

said by dpkform :

Never said the CONS have no real voters - about a third of Canadians plan to vote Con. But let's not be naive here, companies and political parties employ guerilla marketing. For the cons its just most obvious - particularly in the Star, but across all major media.

said by dpkform :

Harper is now screwing up the financial utopia handed to him by the Liberals - with a complete lack of management other than to mindlessly reduce government and taxes. We have all seen how well that works in the USA.

said by dpkform :

Yes - true that parties run sacrificial candidates if they don't expect to win - but again - that's not leadership. Parkdale High-Park is probably the most socially and economically diverse riding in the country. Homes in High Park sell for an average of $1.2million, while in Parkdale, 50% of all new immigrants to Toronto settle, with a household median income under $20,000. I live in High Park - and have yet to see a single CON sign.

said by tertech :

I am evil! At least if you believe the platform of the Liberals, NDP, and Greens. They think that I should pay way more for everything I use and will give a tax break to "low and middle income" families to offset their additional costs. Screw me, evil bastard, I don't fit in that category.

said by dpkform :

That's why I made the point I like reading posts here from real Con supporters. Not hard after watching forums for a while to tell the difference between paid shrills and real people.

said by Tenar :

quote:

---

paying people to post pro-con, anti-abc stuff in those forums

---

Wha?? Because no one could possibly be a real conservitive supporter? :huh:

quote:

---

But really how can one support a party that is so manipulative?

---

Because they have my handy tin foil hat that protects from haper manipulation. Get yours today only $5.

quote:

---

I live in the Toronto riding of Parkdale-High Park, where the cons don't have even the slightest chance of getting elected. You see green, liberal, and NDP signs - this time around I have not seen even 1 CON sign anywhere.

---

It not unusual for a party to basically ignore candidates they know can't win. Every party does it.

said by jfmezei :

Tonight, there was the french debate aimed at the republic of Québec.

La Presse started with a poll result for Québec:
Bloc: 31%
Reform: 30%
Liberals: 16%
NDP: 16%
Green: 8%

Basically 4 people against Harper. Layton had a couple of jabs at Dion, but otherwise, no attacks on Dion. Many repeated references from all about Harper helping oil companies.

Duceppe is, as usual, very good at debates.

Layton has become more fluent in french.

Elizabeth May has surpassed expectations in terms of her abilities to speak french. It will be interesting to see her contributions in the english debate.

Ok, debate is over. The french news starts with "Tonight, Harper was attacked from all sides".

said by Doctor :

With regards to net neutrality, that will not be an issue. There are more important things I will be voting for, and net neutrality doesn't even enter the picture.

said by whay he said :

yup, there is a website up by the green party that shows who is leading by the polls.

»www.voteforenvironment.ca/

enter your postal code (top right) and it will show who is leading in your area and expected to win.

Now this poll data can/should be used to stratigically vote out the leader. So as an example, if the CONS are in the lead, everyone should concentrate their vote on the party just under it in order to get them out.

came across this on Michael Geist's site.

said by jfmezei :

This is the ideal situation. But when Poll show that the decision on who will be next prime minister has already been made, and you do not agree with that, then your vote is to choose who will be the opposition. Which party has the record of being the most effective opposition.

said by lyth :

Some great sites there, Bloodknight! I especially like voteforenvironment.ca :)

I was going to vote NDP until I checked that site, since I thought the liberals dominated my riding last election. Turns out I was wrong and the liberals only won by a couple of hundred votes. So as much as it sucks, I'm going to vote liberal this time around to ensure we don't end up with some screwy conservative.

said by InTO :

In case anyone is interested all of us "ABCers" have a website.

»www.anythingbutconservative.com

I skimmed over some of it and it looks legit.

said by Tenar :

I'm sorry, this just sounds like fear mongering to me. Harper's views are far from the Reform's radical members. He dropped out of the reform party back in 1997 and opposed Day (who you might argue as a radical 'reformer') as leader of Canadian Alliance.

I hope everyone votes for what they believe in, but I also hope they check the facts and not just fall for propaganda positive or negative.

said by eots :

The only way Reform could get into power was to merge with the Conservatives and drop the Reform name. That tells you how popular the Reform party was outside of BC.

I'm going to give the NDP a shot this time, I can't stand Harper or Dion.

said by R0CKY :

...The current leader isn't conservative, it's Reform so draw your own conclusions from there... :huh:

said by BenFromToronto :

Liberals had 13 years to change anything they are bitching about now. Until the Conservatives screw up, I'm voting for them.

said by BenFromToronto :

...Reading the crap about how Harper is just like the Republicans is typical crap regurgitated from Liberal Politicians. Canadian politics is very LEFT, even compared to the Democrats....

said by TOPDAWG :

Find out what bills he supports and look at his record. It's boring to look at that stuff but hey you can get a good idea of what someone is about doing that.

said by tertech :

So, do you think we're being manipulated?

said by drjp81 :

Interesting thing though, is that she started another sentence, before saying she agreed with that assessment. She could be referring to an assessment in the following up statement.

That clip seems to manipulate the intended message, by the way it was edited short. The rest of her statement should be included to be fair. Otherwise I also think it is a irresponsible thing to post and publicise.
...

said by milnoc :

I've read the cease and desist email, and it looks like a fake. The poor sentence structure was a dead giveaway. The conditions for removal (one hour) were also unreasonable and I believe unenforceable. Not everyone runs their email client all day long (I run mine once every couple of hours at the most). As for the video, all I've heard was a small portion of it. Where's the rest of the interview? When and where was it recorded? And what was the main subject?

It smells like another fabricated story to me.

said by Maynard G Krebs :

In today's Toronto Star

»www.thestar.com/comment/article/492389

Harper's running on flawed record
....

said by Turbinator :

That also gives you no right to complain about anything, since you didn't vote at all.

said by bjlockie :

I have decided to vote Green.
It is totally wrong to exclude Elizabeth May from the party debates and I will not vote for any party that supported her exclusion.

said by tertech :

I think you're confusing despair for condescension. I said "how do I go about selecting" and "whoever will let me make". The only one I could be insulting here would be myself! I didn't say "you people", and even avoided using "we" or "us" for that very reason.

Yes, the Liberals and Conservatives were the ones at the helm while this mess was going on; and it has been going on for much longer than the current and previous governments have been in power. Are these issues really within their control, or is it all part of a larger global situation that little old Canada has no control over or even any significant effect upon? Do you really think any of the political parties are going to come in and shut down the oils sands or stop the flow of oil to the U.S., pull out of our NATO commitment, and stop the tide of manufacturing jobs out of Ontario? They might say they will, but I doubt any of them would really risk the global repercussions of such actions.

Once you've come to believe that whoever you elect will be helpless to really make a difference on the big issues, what's left but the minutia? The general gist of the opinions here center around C-61 and net-neutrality because that's within the scope of this board. If I were posting on a board for aircraft enthusiasts, I might have said I would vote for whoever would lower landing fees.

said by DjEclipse :

Why would you keep the government in power that brought this country to the poor state we are in? The liberals and Concervatives are the ones that got us in this mess, who in their right mind would want to keep them in power?

And please don't be so ignorant, and insult the users here by trying to classify everything going on here as a matter of a bunch of people that want to copy DVD's. Don't be so pompus

said by jfmezei :

As long as the Liberal party doesn't suffer a clear defeat, they will not have the guts to oust that civil servant and choose a real leader. As long as an ulectable Dion remains the head of the party, he will not oppose Harper.

said by tertech :

OK, we have an energy policy that has Northern Alberta turned into a moonscape while depleting massive amounts of our natural gas reserves - so that the Americans can have 2 million bbl/day of our oil and pay $3.80/gal to fill their SUVs while we're paying $4.50.

We have a foreign policy that has had almost 100 brave young Canadians killed in a war to bring democracy to a country that is the biggest heroin exporter on the planet.

The economic outlook for Ontario, formerly know as 'the engine of Canada's economy' will soon be accepting transfer payments from Nfld.

With all this and much more, how do I go about selecting a new government? By voting for whoever will let me make copies of my DVDs of course!

said by Rastan :

The fact of the matter is that there will always be X amount of people who will be forced to take jobs that pay minimum wage. I'd love to see you try to convince these people that they wouldn't benefit from a pay increase.

Job training and better education is an entirely separate issue and the federal government can impose a nationwide minimum wage increase, if they wanted to.

said by Rastan :

I'm voting for the NDP, mostly for these reasons:

- They have been fighting for an increase in minimum wage harder than any other party. How can people survive on minimum wage? The cost of living keeps going up but minimum wage remains relatively the same.

said by DjEclipse :

Voting Liberal, just because you don't think NDP or Greens have a chance is simply stupid. Everyone bitches about how horrible the liberals (and conservatives) are, how bad they "run" the country, and come election time these same people end up voting for them.

Vote for the right party and give that party more seats/ power. If everyone would do this when the liberals fucked things up years ago we'd have the NDP and green party with much more power today and in a decent position to actually win an election.

Change has to start somewhere, and voting for the lesser of the 2 evil parties is not the way it's going to happen. Don't be a coward and pretend to do "strategic voting", as "strategic voting" is simply cop out. Vote for the party you actually want to see win, give them some power!

The liberals are no better the the conservatives, with either of them in power we will get our freedoms and the internet taken away form us over the next few years to come.

said by timc :

Sure. I based my comment on the fact that the Green Party has run candidates in every riding for the past two elections. None of the parties have a full slate of candidates yet.

said by Maynard G Krebs :

I tend to agree with you. But here's the rub.....the Green's aren't going to win more than one or two seats max. So you need to vote strategically and cast your ballot for Liberals in ridings where the Green's have no traction.

said by milnoc :

....major snip....

The way I see it, the Greens and Liberals are the only true democratic type parties left in this election. The other parties now have about as much compassion as a dictatorship, including the NDP.

said by Maynard G Krebs :

This polarization that Harper seems to enjoy is not good for the country in its dialog between the feds and the provinces, the feds and municipalities, and at a time when the US seems as though it may finally electing a more moderate government. Last thing we need is either a Harper pit bull with Obama as president, but especially not Harper with Bomb Bomb Iran McCain at the helm in the USA.

said by R0CKY :

Thinking everyone should watch to see where things are heading during the elections and vote accordingly.... Thinking the more spread the parties are the better, but the problem is if Blue get back in (which is likely right now).

My guess is, if the goal is to remove Reform from power, everyone would have to vote Libs, and flip a coin from there....

The problem with voting NDP or Green right now is that we remove a vote for the Libs who are almost for sure going to be #2 to the PCs...

It's a double edge sword on this one..... Voting on the side flavours to go against the Conservatives may land up making things worse! :huh:

said by cpsycho :

I look at more then net neutrality. I look at the SPP too.

Librals started it Tories were trying to push it through. Two parties who want to sell out canada.

I personaly like green and vote for them all the time. But with this election I personaly think we need a better win. So I will have to vote for NDP they are against the SPP. Charlie Angus is on the front line for net neutrality. They also have a decient green plain.

If we really want to make every vote count then we all would either need to vote green party or NDP and hope that either one gets a majority. But never forget who started NAFTA.

I am not part of any party but I will be helping as much in the campian as possible. I will prit flyers and hand things out to help inform people of the state of net neutrality bill c61 and the SPP.

said by timc :

Sure. I based my comment on the fact that the Green Party has run candidates in every riding for the past two elections. None of the parties have a full slate of candidates yet.

said by cpsycho :

So I guess from what people are saying,is the best we can hope for a vary small minority govenrment. With either green or NDP being second and third and that way the minority cant sneeze without these two getting in the way.

said by timc :

There are Green candidates in every Canadian riding, but I would be surprised if they won any seats. It hasn't happened yet. I can't see the NDP winning any more seats than they already have, but if so, it will probably be by taking Liberal seats away.

said by Tenar :

I don't think Green runs in enough ridings to even hope of that. NDP might run in enough ridings, I'm not sure, but they won't win a majority if they are extremely lucky they might be opposition by stealing liberal votes.

said by cpsycho :

...If we really want to make every vote count then we all would either need to vote green party or NDP and hope that either one gets a majority....

said by DR_JAY :

Can't vote. I am from Ontario but here in Montreal for school.

said by JayMan :

When I was at school in toronto I voted there. Elections Canada came and registered everyone in the residence.

said by DR_JAY :

Can't vote. I am from Ontario but here in Montreal for school.

said by cluster5 :

The Industry minister would be in a better position to act for or against it. Perhaps, not act a all like the current one chose.

said by Gat here :

I contacted Nadeau about the copyright bill. He refused to reply and instead pssed it up the chain to the heritage minister (a Bloc pq) who then told me how wonderfull the new copyright bill is and that Nadeau supports it.

said by cluster5 :

Things changed at the last election and Bloc Quebecois passed (Less bad IMO - Mr. Nadeau is quite involved).

said by Tenar :

The government does not influence the CRTC that way. If anything the CRTC is a liberal organization since it was founded by a liberal government.

I didn't see the CBC change any of their views just because the government was conservative.

said by jfmezei :

If the governmnet does not change on Oct14, the CRTC will probably continue to apply whatever philosophy the Reform/Republicans have asked the CRTC to implement.

But if there is a change of governmnent, the CRTC council would likely forget whatever influence Harper may have had and either go with a totally independant decision, or await some guidance from the new government.

I think it would be fair to state that Bell's legal affairs department probably donates as much money to Reform as it does to the Liberals. So if the Liberals by some freak accident of nature were to get to power, I don't think that they would influence the CRTC to be on our side.

said by cbp :

Is there a website/organization that keeps track of the promises these guys make and what they have achieved while in power/at the parliament?

I wouldn't want to vote for some party that once in power will turn 180degrees and start kissing uncle Sam's arse yet again.

said by R0CKY :

This is the touchy part right now as giving the libs a majority or Parliament control is likely to be better than the conservatives... Voting NDP will likely make for a good opposition but not voting red might allow the conservatives majority..... :huh:

I think holding back until the last couple hours of voting to see just how much control the conservatives will have and from there vote accordingly...

No matter what this election might have a very large impact on all of our internet futures....

said by DR_JAY :

Can't vote. I am from Ontario but here in Montreal for school.

said by shopkins :

I will send an email and ask each of the candidates in my riding their stance on bill c-61 and net neutrality.

said by JayMan :

So an election was called today.
What are the plans people?

said by Radar73 :

The problem with voting for Dion is then you have a tool as Prime Minister who will raise your taxes under the guise of green.

said by chronoss2008 :

well its either NDP or GREENS

look at last election and the current scene which would do best in your area,
if either is a no show at all then do the liberal thing

AKA in my area liberals lost by 3% to a conservative whom seems more bent on spending millions on a train set er line for jobs that wont come then fixing flood issued infrastructure and improving the city ( hes a car sales men for toyota to boot )

They even tried or were going to place a ACTUAL uranium mine RIGHT downtown ( as i see it there is no safe way to extract the stuff so go ahead and pollute your business core , and of course that failed )

So it may be i may vote GREEN here or liberal, seems the green candidate is getting news coverage too.

Be neat if peterborough got a green MP, on top of what may be a few out west.
-------------
Oh yah look at Saskatchewan provincial politics to see what it means to be a liberal or conservative ( OH SAME THING AND SAME PARTY )

said by Its a Secret :

I'll vote NDP, win or lose. We have to get rid of the Cons and Libs, you're just wiping your butt with the same tissue!

said by bgw :

Just remember if the Conservatives get a majority....

said by Its a Secret :

I'll vote NDP, win or lose. We have to get rid of the Cons and Libs, you're just wiping your butt with the same tissue!

said by shopkins :

Voter apathy is the reason that we have been stuck with many governments.

It is my opinion that if you choose to not vote due to (1) ignorance (2) intentional absence or (3) spite (and probably a bunch of other reasons) you have no rights as a potential voter to complain about what government has been elected nor their policies and actions.

Whether strategic or not this is not a dictatorship. You do get to make a choice so use it !

said by eots :

Voter apathy is the reason we got stuck with Harper in the first place!

said by eots :

Voter apathy is the reason we got stuck with Harper in the first place!

said by mlerner :

^ agreed.

said by JayMan :

Only problem is bill c-61 is dead and if it was to come back it most likely wouldn't be the same bill as before.

said by tertech :

Stay home.

Then no matter which party gets elected, when they screw up - and inevitably they will - I can honestly say "I didn't vote for them!" :huh: