218 reasons NOT to vote for the Liberals - the Toronto Sun - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

calculoso · 01-22-2006, 07:44 PM

218 reasons NOT to vote for the Liberals - the Toronto Sun

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Elect...05861-sun.html

Some of these reasons are pretty lame, some are reasons to vote for the Liberals, but some are pretty valid as reasons. The main ones I look to? The ones about policy in the Red Book and especially:

Quote:

102 "Cynicism about public institutions, governments, politicians, and the political process is at an all-time high ... Honesty and integrity in our political institutions must be restored."

-- 1993 Red Book, co-written by Paul Martin

103 "Screw the Red Book. Don't tell me what's in the Red Book. I wrote the goddamned thing. And I know that it's a lot of crap."

-- Martin as quoted in the 1996 book Double Vision: The Inside Story of the Liberals in Power

If their whole election platform is a lot of crap, what do they stand for?

CaptainCrunch · 01-22-2006, 08:08 PM

which ever way the wind blows, Paul Martin will be on that side. Its a scathing indictment of the so called values of the Liberal Party who actually stand for nothing except holding on to power, and keeping anyone from looking at where the money has actually gone. I'm betting the smoke stacks at the government offices are burning black tonight as files and documents are burned

MarchHare · 01-22-2006, 09:07 PM

Quote:

which ever way the wind blows, Paul Martin will be on that side.

There's two ways of looking at that.

You can either criticize them for saying that as a party they lack the resolve to implement unpopular measures, or you can say they're following the will of the majority of their constituents, which is how democracy is supposed to work.

It's an interesting critique of a political party to chastise them for doing what's popular with the voters...

FireFly · 01-22-2006, 09:09 PM

Not doing, claiming they will do and then not doing it.

Shawnski · 01-22-2006, 09:10 PM

Actually March, there are several places that Martin has been criticized for falling on BOTH sides of an argument, just at different times, which ever suits him at the time. I am sure you are well aware of these cases..... some are discussed in the posted article.

Jagger · 01-22-2006, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireFly

Not doing, claiming they will do and then not doing it.

DING DING DING We have a winner.

I simply cannot understand why people voting Liberal fail to see that they have broken an incredible amount of promises. They say what they think people want to hear to get elected then simply don't act on them when they are.

Bobblehead · 01-22-2006, 11:08 PM

As a theoretical question, what happens if the Conservatives don't keep some of their promises?

Will people say:
- thats politics?
- they were fibbing?
- bending to the will of their constituents?

Will this board hold the Conservatives to the same standards the Liberals have been criticised for not upholding?

Winsor_Pilates · 01-22-2006, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireFly

Not doing, claiming they will do and then not doing it.

That still doesn't address the issue of criticizing a party for doing what's popular with the populous.
The Liberals actions aside, what do you think of the idea? Should the party (any party) be criticized for taking the side of its citizens?

Jayems · 01-22-2006, 11:19 PM

I hate that I have to vote for rob anders. It sickens me, but it has to be done.... someone needs to challenge that idiot.. someone who actually doesn't leave during an election.

icarus · 01-22-2006, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayems

It sickens me, but it has to be done

If it sickens you to vote for him, then don't vote for him. It's simple. There are at least four candidates running in your riding, surely they don't all sicken you.

kevman · 01-22-2006, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayems

I hate that I have to vote for rob anders. It sickens me, but it has to be done.... someone needs to challenge that idiot.. someone who actually doesn't leave during an election.

I'm glad I live a block east of crowchild trail. Mr. Prentice is a stand up guy.

However, if I were to live on 25th st. instead Anders would get my vote. I may hesitate, I may not like it, but in Canada you really are voting for the party and not the MP.

Incinerator · 01-23-2006, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 218 reasons NOT to vote Liberal

#217
Personal income tax burden: Highest in G-8, says OECD

'nuff said.

Sidney Crosby's Hat · 01-23-2006, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

As a theoretical question, what happens if the Conservatives don't keep some of their promises?

Will people say:
- thats politics?
- they were fibbing?
- bending to the will of their constituents?

Will this board hold the Conservatives to the same standards the Liberals have been criticised for not upholding?

The last time the Conservatives didn't keep their promises they were reduced from 170 seats to 2.

Ace · 01-23-2006, 12:29 PM

Quote:

173 2005: Established $3.7-million pilot project to set up tattoo parlours in prisons.

I totally missed that one. What a stupid idea

FireFly · 01-23-2006, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

That still doesn't address the issue of criticizing a party for doing what's popular with the populous.
The Liberals actions aside, what do you think of the idea? Should the party (any party) be criticized for taking the side of its citizens?

When you get elected based on saying you'll do something that's popular, and then you don't do it, that's lying. No one is criticizing them for taking the side of the people. They're criticizing them for taking the side of the people when they need to, and backstabbing them as soon as the election is over.

Canada 02 · 01-23-2006, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace

I totally missed that one. What a stupid idea

Wait til someone gets HIV or hepatitis then sues the government

Winsor_Pilates · 01-23-2006, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireFly

When you get elected based on saying you'll do something that's popular, and then you don't do it, that's lying. No one is criticizing them for taking the side of the people. They're criticizing them for taking the side of the people when they need to, and backstabbing them as soon as the election is over.

Actually they were criticizing them for taking the popular opinion and said nothing about their lying or following through on their word. I'm not debating that the Liberals are lyers, I'm just wondering if you can have an opinion of the concept in question without looking to which party the concept is coming from?

The principle goes well beyond the Liberals, do you not have any opinion of it beyond them?
Can you form any opinion about an issue without knowing if it's supported by the Libs or Cons, or does the messenger always determine your opinion of the message?

FireFly · 01-23-2006, 08:34 PM

The Green have good messages and the NDPers as well. Who says it doesn't matter, all politicians say nice things. There will never be a politician say 'I'm going to raise taxes and cut your services' they'd never get elected. It's about feasibility though. When the Conservatives said 'Unemployment is going to remain high for a few years' they lost the election. Why? It was the truth, and no one wanted to hear it. Do I blame the Liberals for saying 'we're going to do everything we can to lower unemployment"? No. I blame them for not doing anything though.

Catering to the lowest common denominator is reprehensible. The Liberals are guilty of this. They promise the world knowing that the uneducated will believe they can accomplish all the things they say they can and vote for them. However, the Conservatives don't get elected because people don't understand how their platform will benefit them, even if will more than the Liberals.

Perhaps reprehensible is too strong a word, but that's what they do. They'll sway as people sway and promise the world to them in language the masses will understand.