Another Rant on Politicians & Parties: Split from Address by the Prime Minister

[I_am_John_Galt]

Sad thing is, you'll never know why it is beyond your comprehension.  Good news - ignorance is bliss.

Actually that last phrase answers his question ...

 

[pronto]

Got called off to an interminable meeting, just back now... God help me....

Interesting debate all! I think the name-calling a little puerile, but some really good points. Thanks, I am beginning to feel less isolated in  my thoughts and positions. Interestingly enough, I am seeing that the Liberal supporters and conservative supporters are all relatively similar in stance and attitude. Actually, unsurprising given that the majority of respondants seem to be of the opinion that either we get the government we deserve, or all politicians are the same, and we should just hold our noses and vote for whomever we feel stinks and lies the least. Two not dissimilar camps!

As a matter of interest, I was on a telecon this afternoon with someone relatively senior from the US, and innocently (heh heh >) asked them what their opinion was. They are a staunch republican supporter, and subscribe to the "who stinks less, gets my vote"

Based on the (mostly) reasoned discourse on the board here, my guess is that we are not getting the government we deserve!

Thanks

 

[Gunner]

my guess is that we are not getting the government we deserve!

Nor are we getting the government we demand!  Apathetic voters begate apathetic politicians.

 

[aesop081]

Nor are we getting the government we demand!   Apathetic voters begate apathetic politicians.

I may be far off but i think that we have apathetic voters because a good portion of the voting public feels they have a lack of options ( by that i mean that one politician is no better than the other).  Of course thats just my opinion.  I took political science in university and this is something that was discussed very often.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

I think maybe you are all missing the point - there is not a single politician who has been upfront. None, Nyet, Zip, Ziltch, Nada, zero. My point - it is the nature of the beast, and the sooner we all recognise and acknowledge that, the better off and happier we will all be.

Are all politicians liars or is it that we just keep re-electing the liars? 

 

[Zipper]

I think there is a basis for both. In order to get elected and stay there, you have to tell the people what they want to hear. If that requires a lie, then off to the lie they go as long as they get re-elected.

 

[Gunner]

I may be far off but i think that we have apathetic voters because a good portion of the voting public feels they have a lack of options ( by that i mean that one politician is no better than the other).  Of course thats just my opinion.  I took political science in university and this is something that was discussed very often.

There are options and for a democracy to work, its citizens must be involved and hold their representatives accountable for their parties actions.  Think of how alienated the West is after having been continually shut out of Central Canada government.  Reform wanted to change the way Canadian politics was played but they never received any media support and in the end had to water down the parties values in an attempt to attract the main stream voter.  I hold the "free press" that we alledgedly have for not holding the government accountable and too cozy of a relationship with the Liberal party of Canada.  Remember Maclean's magazine two elections ago (Canadian Alliance - How Scary?).  Where are the headlines (Liberals - How corrupt?).  

Here's the latest poll off Bourque.ca

Pollara : Con 35% Lib 31% Ndp 18% (ntl) Lib 39% Con 38% Nd 19% (ont)

What the heck are you easterners smoking in Ontario?  I shake my head at how you can allow this gang of thieves to continue sticking their hands in our pockets in the name of federalism.

 

[aesop081]

There are options and for a democracy to work, its citizens must be involved and hold their representatives accountable for their parties actions.  Think of how alienated the West is after having been continually shut out of Central Canada government.  Reform wanted to change the way Canadian politics was played but they never received any media support and in the end had to water down the parties values in an attempt to attract the main stream voter.  I hold the "free press" that we alledgedly have for not holding the government accountable and too cozy of a relationship with the Liberal party of Canada.  Remember Maclean's magazine two elections ago (Canadian Alliance - How Scary?).  Where are the headlines (Liberals - How corrupt?).  

Gunner, i couldnt agree more with what you said.  I was just stating an observation i have made trough long discussions on the subject.  Yes i see somewhat of a liberal bias in canadian mainstream media but it is nowhere near the openly "anti-liberal" sentiment you see on US network TV.  howver, you make a very valid point and i would go as far as saying that one of the greatest ricks to vanadian democracy is the lack of popular participation.  If we are to have an election soon and the turnout is low......what kind of a mandate would the government have ?

 

[Gunner]

aesop081,

Maybe there is more that society could learn from a simple book such as "Starship Troopers" outlining the responsibilities of being a citizen of a country vice the mainstream focus on the rights of being a citizen.   

Alas, I think most of the male population just thinks of Starship Troopers as a movie with a good shower scene.  :

Cheers,

 

[aesop081]

aesop081,

Maybe there is more that society could learn from a simple book such as "Starship Troopers" outlining the responsibilities of being a citizen of a country vice the mainstream focus on the rights of being a citizen.    

Alas, I think most of the male population just thinks of Starship Troopers as a movie with a good shower scene.    :

Cheers,

I absolutely agree.  Maybe its a subject for another thread but i firmly beleive that today's society is too "rights" based.  I think people forget that the price for having those rights is fulfilling obligations and duties as citizens of a democracy.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>I most certainly know how to debate intelligently.

Then I assume you're intelligent enough to understand what rhetoric is, and intelligent enough to recognize that some people object to uncomfortable truths and object to how those truths might be used in any other way than to further the "permitted" narratives to which those people subscribe.

 

[Zipper]

I guess it comes down too...                ...the Liberal's got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Past governments did not. Doesn't mean they didn't have their hands in there too.

The reason that "central" Canada does not sway easily is because they are looking at the whole picture of what the "conservative" party and Harper represents as a whole. And they say no. Big shocker? Not.

Choices in an election? Few if any.

 

[Glorified Ape]

What the heck are you easterners smoking in Ontario?  I shake my head at how you can allow this gang of thieves to continue sticking their hands in our pockets in the name of federalism.

Ah, the old "crap on Ontario" routine - because that hasn't gotten old or anything. If the West spent half as much time breeding/attracting immigrants as they do complaining, you'd be in a much better position to influence elections. As an Ontarian (living outside Ontario presently) I can tell you my take: I can vote for the Liberals, knowing their thievery and self-serving idiocy or I can vote for the Conservatives, knowing that I disagree with 75% of their platform and question whether the remaining 25% is likely to ever see the light of day. I'd love to serve in a CF with the type of funding that the Conservatives promise but what has to be reconciled with that is whether I'd love to live in a country with the foreign policy and social repercussions that would likely follow a Conservative government. It comes down to voting for my wallet or my conscience, in which case I'm inclined to pick the latter.

I hate what the Libs have done and how they've behaved, but there's alot they've done that I agree with - namely gay marriage, staying out of Iraq, rejecting BMD, forgiving debt, decriminalizing marijuana, etc. I acknowledge the legitimacy of arguments for/against each of those, so lets not get into a giant debate about each. There are things the Conservatives push for that I'd like to see, I just can't reconcile myself to accepting all the crap I wouldn't want to see coming with it.

I think there is a basis for both. In order to get elected and stay there, you have to tell the people what they want to hear. If that requires a lie, then off to the lie they go as long as they get re-elected.

If politicians were honest about what they would have to do to get done what the populous wants them to get done, they'd never be elected. If politicians realistically stated what they could get done, they'd never get elected. It's like advertising - if beer/liquor companies showed people vomitting everywhere, making asses of themselves, fighting, being impotent, descending into alcoholism, and waking up with horrible hangovers they wouldn't sell as much booze, as realistic as the ad may be.

The population (including myself) is largely ignorant of what the political process is really like, what's possible, and what it takes to operate therein. As such, the politicians paint a picture, lie, and try to make it look appealing enough that they can actually get in a position to do something. I don't blame politicians for lying much of the time - what we want from them and what they can actually get done are two different things. If they're honest with us about the latter, they'd never get elected since it doesn't jive well with the former. The tired old cliche fits - we can't handle the truth.  

 

[2 Cdo]

So another person thinks that it is Ok to side with a party known for it's lying and stealing. Glorified Ape, I notice you are an officer cadet trying to make it in the infantry. All I have to say is I sincerely hope that I never have to work for you (if you make it), as your beliefs just seem to be a bit out of wack for a commissioned officer.

 

[Gunner]

"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains."
-- Sir Winston Leonard Spenser Churchill (1874-1965), British statesman, prime minister, author

 

[Glorified Ape]

Churchill quote..

Define "liberal" and "conservative". I carry views that fit both descriptions, depending on which context you're using those terms in. As I said, both the Liberal and Conservative parties advance policies that I agree with, though I believe Churchill's black/white characterization of politics is as undesirable and counterproductive as his alcoholism was.

So another person thinks that it is Ok to side with a party known for it's lying and stealing. Glorified Ape, I notice you are an officer cadet trying to make it in the infantry. All I have to say is I sincerely hope that I never have to work for you (if you make it), as your beliefs just seem to be a bit out of wack for a commissioned officer.

My point was that it was a "two evils" scenario - I can the pick the one I know and whose platform I agree with most, but their behaviour leaves much to be desired. Or I can pick the one I don't know, whose platform I largely disagree with, but whose conduct and behaviour are better. Given the choice, I pick the first because it comes down to a cost-benefit workout: get policies I largely agree with put in place by a bunch of a-holes or get policies, most of which I disagree with, put in place by (apparently) half-decent politicians. I can either vote for a party whose platform I don't believe in, and thus don't believe is in the best interests of the country, based on their likely conduct and likelihood of personal benefit, or I can vote for a party whose conduct is poor but whose platform I agree with (to a greater extent), but will likely not personally benefit me. That's politics. Edit: To pick either one is to compromise one's beliefs and so they are morally equivalent.

I'm curious as to what aspect of my political views you believe are contrary to performing properly as a commissioned officer?

 

[onecat]

"Sad thing is, you'll never know why it is beyond your comprehension.  Good news - ignorance is bliss."

that's okay Micheal, I know your just upset because you really want one of those t-shirts I'm going be making... ;D but because your Liberal party support ( if not that's cool but from your other posts here one would think you are) you can wear them in public.  maybe I'll put that in the t-stirt too... yes on the back.  Good news - ignorance is bliss.  You take a XL right? :dontpanic:

All kidding side, I found your last post to be very rude and if you weren't all ready on the broad I would report your comments. I've seen others here a verbal warning for less.

 

[old medic]

Its sad how quickly some adults here quickly turn to mud slinging.

Frankly, no party is any better than the other. It's all politics and
politics by nature is dirty. Here's a "Rant on Politicians & Parties" :

Party X and their leader P.T. comes to power, feeds at the trough,
appoints pals to a few positions, cuts the heck out of the military
budget, get into a few scandals and then P.T. retires to leave his
"pal" J.T. holding the bag......

We all get upset and vote them out, (we sure showed them).....

Party Y and their leader B.M. comes to power, feeds at the trough,
appoints pals to a few positions, cuts the heck out of the military
budget, gets into a few scandals and then B.M. retires to leave his
"pal" K.C. holding the bag....

We all get upset and vote them out, (we sure showed them).....

Party X and their leader J.C. comes to power, feeds at the trough,
appoints pals to a few positions, cuts the heck out of the military
budget, gets into a few scandals and then J.C. retires to leave his
"pal" P.M. holding the bag....

We all get upset.....

But the funniest part is: Some people are still surprised.

 

[Zipper]

"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains."
-- Sir Winston Leonard Spenser Churchill (1874-1965), British statesman, prime minister, author

I guess I have no heart, and no brains? (Don't all jump on that one at once ;D) As a Red Tory that has had his party swept out from under him, I find it difficult to side with either.

Otherwise. Good posts by Ape and Medic. You've both hit very close to where I stand.

 

[TCBF]

I don't think the Reform and the PCs should have merged - to me, they are poles apart on issues of the role and size of government.  I think the Liberals and the PCs should have merged, as they are two sides of the same leftist/big govt/big union/big commerce  coin. 

A good system, where essentially the same group of lawyers divides themselves in half and pretend to be in competition and pretend to offer the electorate "choice".  Of course, for them to merge would have been to spoil the ruse, so instead the PCs were merged into Reform/CA/Whatever to water it down so that in 10 years or less it will be dogmatically similar to the old PCs, and all of those Prarie populists will be back where they started in 1987.  Disenfranchised.  NEP 2006 here we come.