Good for you. Two strong candidates worth taking a look at. Clearly, better organized than the NDP with the ever changing nomination date and different than the contentious race of the Cons. Best of luck to both of you.

It would be great to see the 99 % of the people get some representation again but I don’t see a difference between the libs and the cons other than the libs being able to balance the books . And the cons inability to tell the truth or balance anything .

#ready4change #cdnpoli

Holy cow Peeps. You woke up talking to yourself.

Ataloss:-” I don’t see a difference between the libs and the cons other than the libs being able to balance the books . ”
—————————————————————————————–

And the NDP has such a sterling record when it comes to balancing the books? And the Greens, with their somewhat unbalanced leader?

Really, ataloss, even as far back as the 1700’s, when Adam Smith was busy making a name for himself as the father of modern economics, it was recognised that a National Debt and other forms of debt were far different from one another.

It’s all to the well and good to call for permanently balanced budgets, and even better to call for them to be balanced solely from taxation rather than from increased borrowing, but before any of that can be put into effect meaningfully, the system of accounting currently used has to be changed. Right now, a rising National Debt is not necessarily an indication of a spendthrift government, (like it has been in times past under various Liberal administrations, PET’s most notably), but rather of the absence of a proper Capital Account in a set of governmental books that show a valuation of the Assets we never see, as well as the Liabilities we do.

maybe we will get someone decent from the Green party….

Socredible.. The NDP have never been the ruling party in Canada.. How do,you know how they will do balancing a budget. If you are trying to compare a provincial party to a federal one you are wasting time.. It’s like comparing baseball to football.. Both are team games but the rules are not the same.

I see that the reformers, if elected, are now proposing to ban people from travelling to “places that are ground zero for terrorist activity” (whatever the heck that means . . . maybe it changes depending on which way the wind is blowing), by making it a criminal offence.

Per the story from the CBC:

“Harper indicated exceptions might be made for some individuals — such as aid workers, diplomats and journalists — but maintained there are “few legitimate reasons” to travel to such parts of the world.

Travel to such places is “not a human right,” Harper said, responding to a question about the proposed legislation’s implications on civil liberties.”

For a government that is so focused on wanting to stay out of people’s lives, they sure do seem to like to tell people what they can or can’t do.

I have some questions:

1) Who is Stephen Harper to tell Canadians whether their reasons to visit somewhere in the world are legitimate or not?
2) What places are ground zero and who decides? What are the criteria? Is one terrorist activity enough? Two? Ten? Does it have to be a muslim country? Has this been sorted out or are they proposing to restrict people’s movements on a whim?
3) How do you define terrorism for purposes of this proposed legislation? Does it include eco-terrorism? Economic terrorism? Other? War crimes perhaps?

I have absolutely no problem with banning travel to a war torn country.
keeps wannabe terrorists from going there, and looky loo tourists too stupid to realize they could be taken hostage, then our governments is inundated with relatives crying to get their people back.

How many times has Harper changed his hair colour in the last month ?

Stick with the blue colour Steve. Nice blue hairrrr dooooo !

PVal wrote:-“Socredible.. The NDP have never been the ruling party in Canada.. How do,you know how they will do balancing a budget. If you are trying to compare a provincial party to a federal one you are wasting time.. It’s like comparing baseball to football.. Both are team games but the rules are not the same.”
————————————————————————-
But amongst the three mainstream Parties only the NDP holds hard and fast to its fundamentally socialistic ideology both provincially and federally. The Liberals and Conservatives differ considerably from province to province, and with their federal counterparts of the same names. And, while all three always call (now) for balanced budgets, (which would be highly desirable, IF we had proper accounting first so the federal budget doesn’t have to be used more as a means of injecting needed new money into the economy in times of recession, or at any other time, but could be an accurate reflection of what it’s going to cost to do things that are actually needed, and best done by governments, simply on their own accord.)

With the Conservatives, there is a chance that the accounting will eventually be changed. With the NDP and the Liberals, there is no chance whatsoever. The former hold to that socialist ideology, which fundamentally is monopoly state capitalism with control by finance; and the latter have always been the political organ of the debt dealers of finance.

“…keeps wannabe terrorists from going there,”….

That is all wrong! Let the wannabe terrorists get on their planes and head for the in-turmoil country of their choice! Good riddance! Why force them to stay here????? Immediately after their final one-way airplane trip cancel their Canadian passports and put them on the black list! The extremists over there welcome new cannon fodder.

If you keep them here they may inflict terrorist acts on us, in our country and on our citizens! How hard is it for Harper to understand that?

Let them fight their internal warfare over there! Why make it our business to begin with? We have enough natural resources here of our own, what is it exactly that we are after?

NMG, when Canadians travel to places which are “places that are ground zero for terrorist activity”, where there are wars going on and often large areas of territory which are not under the control of any recognised government, it is impossible for our government to hold the recognised government of that country responsible for their safety.

How do we get those people out of there if they get into trouble? Pay ransom for their release? After they’ve been warned not to go there in the first place? And if they do go there, in spite of any warnings, and they’re not journalists, or aid workers, or have any legitimate reason whatsoever to go there at that time, then why have they gone? The only reason is that they are in league with the terrorists, and are likely to engage in terrorist activities there. Or here, on their return.

Seems like the Liberals have a total lack of interest in both PG Peace River riding, and PG Cariboo. Having only two people interested in running in an area as large as these two ridings with a population of over 150,000 people indicates that their hearts are not in the battle.

Haven’t heard much from the NDP in regards to who is running.

We have not heard much about the Independent Candidate that was going to run. Is he still in the race or has he changed his mind.

Lastly the Greens. Where are they??

Prince George:-“We have enough natural resources here of our own, what is it exactly that we are after?”
————————————————————————
Markets, Prince George, markets. We do indeed have more than enough natural resources of our own, and human ones, too, for every Canadian to have a standard of living ‘physically’ as good as the wealthiest of our population do, and probably then some, if that’s what was wanted. It’s unlikely it would be. People are all different, and what constitutes a sufficiency of material possessions in the mind of one won’t necessarily be the same as that in the mind of another. While we should all be ‘equal’ before the law, and have, so far as it is humanly possible, ‘equality’ of opportunity, people, in the actual scheme of things are very far from being ‘equal’. And what a boring world it would be if they were.

But what is true ‘physically’ is not now true ‘financially’. And so instead of being able to fully pay FOR what we’ve just produced for our own markets FROM what we’ve just produced for our own markets, we have to produce MORE for other markets. And pretend we are ‘trading it’, when, in larger measure, what we’re trying to do is get somebody else’s ‘money’ converted into ours for it.

Markets, that’s all? Attack fighter planes are strafing those on the ground in order to create markets? What has happened to morals, ethics and basic human right?

Subsection 6(1) of the Charter of Rights says that every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada. It doesn’t include a clause saying “mobility is subject to what the Prime Minister, socredible and/or a panel of elected farmers, business people or lawyers deem as “legitimate reasons”.

If you think it should be a criminal offence for someone to simply travel to a country, I think you’ve lost your mind.

NMG:-“For a government that is so focused on wanting to stay out of people’s lives, they sure do seem to like to tell people what they can or can’t do.”
————————————————————————-

That’s because they want to stay out of people’s lives, NMG, in the hopes that people will act responsibly and not endanger or otherwise adversely effect themselves, but most importantly, other people, by acting irresponsibly. Some people won’t do that, so we have laws made to try to control such behaviour and hold them responsible for their actions .

That’s a really terrible argument socredible and I think you are intelligent enough to know it.

Staying out of peoples’ lives by interfering in them. That’s like the old bombing for peace or having sex for virginity!

Prince George:-“Markets, that’s all? Attack fighter planes are strafing those on the ground in order to create markets? What has happened to morals, ethics and basic human right?”
———————————————————————–

They are all submerged beneath the never ending quest of every country to export more than it imports and get international credit convertible into its own currency for the difference. That was the root cause behind World Wars One and Two. Indeed, Harry Hopkins, FDR’s chief political advisor is on record as saying before Pearl Harbor, when America was still neutral, and most of the American public wanted it to stay that way, that the US could not allow a Nazi victory ~ not because of its adverse effects on “morals, ethics, and human rights” ~ but because such a victory would wreck American export markets.

That’s not going to change if we replace Harper with Trudeau or Mulcair. None of them are going to take the initiative to change it, which none of them could likely do anyways. But eventually it will have to change, or the war for markets will again become military war on a much larger scale.

Palopu:”Seems like the Liberals have a total lack of interest in both PG Peace River riding, and PG Cariboo.”

You could not be more mistaken. Palopu, I do not agree that replacing Harper would not make any difference. It is the first step in a new direction. Americans restrict their leaders from managing (or mismanaging) for more than 8 consecutive years. Harper had 10 years already. That is way more than enough. 10 years in politics can be an eternity.

Socredible, thank you for pointing out historical connections. As for the causes you could have included that Britain was desperately trying to keep its markets (spell colonial empire) intact at all costs. In both wars that were conducted the victors also rewarded themselves with the theft from Germany of over 800 major industrial patents – i.e more than 1,600 in total. You say that the US could not allow a Nazi victory ~ not because of its adverse effects on “morals, ethics, and human rights” ~ but because such a victory would wreck American export markets.

Sad, but mostly true.

NMG:-“That’s a really terrible argument socredible and I think you are intelligent enough to know it.”
—————————————————————————————
Well, turn it around and look at it from the other end. The Canadian government issues a warning to Canadians to stay away from areas where they are likely to have trouble due to ‘terrorist activity’. This need not only be the areas of the Middle East where ISIS currently holds sway, but could be places in Latin America, like parts of Colombia. Or, until recently, areas of Sri Lanka. The warning is not heeded, and the Canadian tourist travels where he’s been warned to stay away from, and is captured by some terrorist group and held for ransom. On pain of death, or worse, if it’s not forthcoming. So now we’re supposed to pay to get him back? AFTER we’ve warned him not to go in the first place. Or do we just tell these groups, “No”, implying that they might as well kill him. Which they do. Then there’s a great hue and cry by the same crowd that’s so down on the government for not having a balanced budget that we should’ve bailed the poor boob out at any cost. That Harper is heartless, and all the rest of it. So what do you want?
If warnings won’t be heeded, yet when they’re not and we are all expected to pay for someone’s stupidity, should there not be some penalty attached? If you go skiing purposefully out of bounds at a ski resort, should you just do it with impunity if you get in a jam? When others have to risk their lives to come and rescue you, and a great deal of money is expended to do that as well? There has to be some ‘responsibility’ taken by the individual for his actions.

NMG and PrinceGeorge are ok with Kadiza Sultana, Amira Abase and Shamima Begum becoming IS brides? Or the three Canadian girls aged 15, 18 and 19 intercepted in Egypt before they could cross the border to Syria. Or the 23 year old Canadian woman who left home to go to the store and ended up in Syria, her family is asking why CSIS didn’t stop her. Or maybe Toronto Jane…

Those examples are all girls who most likely will never return however some others can return because you have no idea that they are fighting on the lines rather than just visiting friends. They can return to influence more people to join them, it is a very complicated circle. You would be OK with your sister all of the sudden ending up in Syria after a marathon radicalization process, or would you rather they caught your brother or sister before they boarded the plane for turkey? Very complex but let us not forget that some of these people are not “terrorists” they just got influenced by such people and inherently not all people after thinking about it clearly would join a terrorist group. There is some prestige that “hey these guys really want me” but after you realize they want you on the front lines or as a baby machine it is a little less glorifying and most people would come to realize that over time.

The biggest reason I think they want to stop them is to keep them from getting trained and returning to Canada afterwards. Look at all the current examples, once there and trained how do you prove it when they are sitting at the border services desk after just getting off the plane? Lawyers will eat you up if you start sending everyone back on the plane.

Prince George:-“As for the causes you could have included that Britain was desperately trying to keep its markets (spell colonial empire) intact at all costs.
—————————————————————————————–
That was why India was the ‘jewel in the crown’ of Empire, PG. Not for what Britain could take out of India, but as a captive market for British manufactured goods that couldn’t be sold anywhere else. The British, on balance, put far more INTO India than they ever took out of it. Such are the inane perversions of finance. When we make a mere figurative ‘abstraction’ ~ money, itself~ more important than the physical reality it’s only supposed to be an accurate numerical ‘reflection’ of.
—————————————————————————————–

PG:-“In both wars that were conducted the victors also rewarded themselves with the theft from Germany of over 800 major industrial patents – i.e more than 1,600 in total.”
————————————————————————————–
Prior to World War One, many important German discoveries in the chemical industries were patented in a form that ensured those discoveries not only remained secret, but that anyone abroad trying to copy the process described in the patent papers would never get the same results, and might even blow themselves up if they tried.

Slinky:-“The biggest reason I think they want to stop them is to keep them from getting trained and returning to Canada afterwards. Look at all the current examples, once there and trained how do you prove it when they are sitting at the border services desk after just getting off the plane? Lawyers will eat you up if you start sending everyone back on the plane.”
—————————————————————————————-
Precisely. The Canadian public does not really have any information on just how extensive this is. CSIS and the RCMP do, but there is no way they can release what they know without compromising the ongoing investigations and monitoring they are engaged in.

The government really is in an unenviable position. It has to ensure that our civil rights are respected, but at the same time try to ensure public safety against terrorist acts. If they neglect the latter, and some of the terrorist acts that have been apprehended here, (and actually carried through in the USA and other countries), and there are public deaths and injuries as a result, the same groups so critical of them now will be calling for their heads for not being more vigilant. And if they’re more vigilant, then they’re intruding on our civil rights.

Sorry guys, I will never agree that the way to solve a problem is by controlling people and charging them with a crime because you think they may commit one or because you don’t happen to agree with their judgement.

IMHO, it’s perverse beyond belief and in complete conflict with how supposedly free countries should operate.

Have to agree with NMG. No government ought to be able to control everyone’s life from cradle to grave.

However, maybe it would help if every citizen, when booking a flight to a foreign country, is given a government pamphlet that gives information which countries are risky to travel to. It should also list the countries where Canada is unable to help if a visitor gets into trouble, like arrest and kidnapping.

After that it is up to every person to make an educated decision to take a risk or not. It appears to me that the parents of those young girls who wanted to sneak out of the country to become brides of those extremists failed in their parental duties.

NMG:-“Sorry guys, I will never agree that the way to solve a problem is by controlling people and charging them with a crime because you think they may commit one or because you don’t happen to agree with their judgement.

IMHO, it’s perverse beyond belief and in complete conflict with how supposedly free countries should operate.”
——————————————————————————————

The one thing that many Canadians respected Pierre Trudeau for was his proclamation of the War Measures Act at the time of the FLQ kidnappings, murder, and bombings. People were ‘detained’ who had not committed any crimes, simply because the government of the day “didn’t agree with their judgement.” What might the alternative have been if Trudeau had not taken this action? More kidnappings, murders, and bombings? No one at that time knew. But if there had been, and the government then had said, “We can’t detain any one who ‘might’ commit a crime, even though we have reasonable evidence that causes us to strongly believe one is going to be committed by this individual, and innocent people will be the victims of it,” and then one WAS committed, who would be blamed for the tragic results that might have been prevented?

This is a story about the liberal nomination? Who side tracked it into a discussion of foreign policy? Anyhow Glad to have a choice other than Zimmer I think he’s done an ok job but the cons take us so for granted I might try liberal this time just to let them know you don’t reward faithfulness by taking people for granted.

Prince George:-“Have to agree with NMG. No government ought to be able to control everyone’s life from cradle to grave. ”
————————————————————————————–

But whether or not any government ‘ought’ to be able to do this, or not, governments already DO do this. From the cradle to the grave. A baby born with birth defects so severe that any possibility of having a decent quality of life later on is virtually impossible cannot be euthanised, even if that’s what the parents agree would be best. Old people, who have lived their lives fully, and know it, and are now confined to extended-care, which they may view as essentially a holding ground for those waiting to die, cannot legally speed up the inevitable. In between, the government does a great many things that controls everyone’s lives.

Prince George. We are not Americans, nor do we have a political system like they do. Time in office for some Canadian Prime Ministers.

William Lyon Mackenzie 21 years
John A Macdonald 19 years
Pierre Trudeau 15 years.
Sir Wilford Laurier 15 years.
John Chretian 10 Years.

So there you have it,. Read it and weep.

Thanks ski51, i was thinking the same thing. Also, i was wondering, who is going to pay to move the litter (election signs) so the City can mow the boulevards around town? Or does the City keep a person walking around in front of crews to remove and then replace them? Or does the City mow around them? Or does the City quit mowing and then hear about it from whinners on here? Already some of Todd’s signs are wind blown or trashed and you dont see any conservative volunteers tending to them…pisses me off to have to see that junk laying around, sooo glad it will only get worse in the next couple months.

Palopu….when you were looking at the list of Prime Ministers, did you notice all the PM’s that were only there for a blink of an eye, are all Conservatives ? Arthur Meighan, Joe Clarke, Kim Campbell etc.

John Turner wasn’t around long, nor was Paul Martin. And they were Liberals.

Socredible… By telling me where I can and can’t travel is staying out of my life..I think not..it’s dictating where I can and can’t go.. C-51 violates my privacy..that’s not staying out of my life..

I do appreciate how you can spin it though.

PVal, if you read through all the Laws that have been enacted by both levels of government, federal and provincial, long before anyone ever heard of Bill C-51, I’m certain you’d find all kinds of things in many of them that could negatively affect you more than Bill C-51 ever will. I’m in the lumber business, and a strict interpretation of some of what’s contained in BC’s Forest Act, for instance, could quite easily put me out of business. The costs of compliance, if what’s written in that Act were taken and interpreted literally, would break me.

If you’re worried about governments ‘staying out of your life’ you’ll have a far greater chance of that happening under Harper’s Conservatives than under either a Liberal or NDP government. They’ll not only be very much in your life in telling you what you can or can’t do, but also in your pocket. The one you keep your wallet in.

Digitus Impudicus

Yes I did notice, I also noticed that of 21 Prime Ministers, 12 were Conservative and 9 were Liberals. Did not see any CCF, or NDP, or Greens, or Independents. Oh well, maybe next time.

? ? ? ?

The Harper government sure likes to make lists. They seem to think there isn’t a problem out there that can’t be solved with a list.

So I wonder if Harper will tell us what the list is and what the criteria is for his proposed travel bans… or will that be an evolving list that grows the more the conservative party gains control over Canada?

Its obvious that this will be a political list so will likely include banning travel for political response as much as any other. One only has to look at Harper when he banned British elected MP Galloway from entering Canada, not because he was a terrorist (no he was a sitting British MP), but rather because he had an opposing view on Israeli occupation. Surely Israel itself would meet the criteria for any terror state list?

Probably the biggest reason for the travel ban list would be to keep any real world reporting getting back to Canada… Things like the isis leader being trained by the Americans and being a mossad asset; or how our allies in Saudi Arabia and Turkey are among the biggest suppliers to the isis cause.

If its an evolving list and one has sick parents back home, or business interests in their home country will this not become a charter challenge? China has terrorist that operate there, or how about the MLF in the Philippines, Jewish extremists in Israel, or pretty much all of Africa and Central South America?

The world will get pretty small for Canadians if Harper gets his way. For a guy that never had a passport before becoming PM I am sure its an issue that will effect him….

It is a well known political principle that nothing works better for a politician to stay in power than to try and install often quite unreasonable fear in people and that she/he is the only one who is able to protect them from whatever the latest enemy or emergency is, whether it be real or invented.

They do it all the time. It also has the advantage that in the consciousness of the voters all other domestic problems and the failure to address them get pushed on the back burners!

One of the largest ‘domestic problems’ of recent years was the rise in separatist sentiment and movements, and even Parties, dedicated to that end in both Quebec and Western Canada. But growing support for that has virtually disappeared under Harper’s government. Some imply that he is a dictatorial control freak. But who were the Prime Ministers before him who caused so many people to want to be out from under THEIR control of this country and its economy that they were willing to break-up the country to achieve it? Most of them, in fact the majority of them, were Liberal Prime Ministers. Hmmm?