Author Topic: Politics in 2016  (Read 309150 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 177,305
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,986
  • Freespeecher
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #25 on: January 01, 2016, 02:49:02 »
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 157,190
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,553
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #26 on: January 01, 2016, 12:31:47 »
Mandate letters from e.g. the PM to ministers, or from CEOs to regional VPs or from Boards of Directors to COOs/managers, are pretty much standard practice and, in my (limited) experience pretty generic ~ mostly "motherhood" with a few good management platitudes thrown in for effect.

In business what counts are the conversations with e.g. the VP Sales regarding the head office's expectation for your region or, perhaps, from one particular member of the executive committee to the new general manager expressing the Board's wishes on one or two specific issues. In th case of ministers the politics will be found in very few, very unofficial notes from the PMO to ministers' (political) chiefs of staff.

These are the first ministerial mandate letters I have ever seen, but they "ring true," to me ... which is worth  :2c:

Transparency is never a bad thing ... but you remember what the road to hell is paved with, don't you?  :nod:

One would think that previous Mandate Letters didn't vary much from the current series of publicly-released letters...  :nod:

There is nothing nefarious with the letters -- sometimes they are just letters formalizing what a Minister's responsibilities to Government are...really.

What will be interesting to see is how the current Government's theme of "openness and transparency" will carry through to discussions/discourse on electoral reform.  :nod:

Regards
G2G

Offline Rocky Mountains

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 4,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 281
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #27 on: January 04, 2016, 13:20:32 »
Seamus O'Regan is a drunk.  No big deal but he was especially uncharitable with Rob Ford.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/liberal-mp-seamus-oregan-checks-wellness-program-seeking-212609074.html

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,397
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #28 on: January 04, 2016, 21:43:03 »
"So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts."

(from Federalist No. 10)
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

Omnia praesidia vestra capta sunt nobis.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

"But injustice is a rule of the service, as you know very well; and since you have to have a good deal of undeserved abuse, you might just as well have it from your friends."  - The Ionian Mission, by Patrick O'Brian.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 96,060
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,469
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #29 on: January 05, 2016, 10:20:57 »
Seamus O'Regan is a drunk.  No big deal but he was especially uncharitable with Rob Ford.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/liberal-mp-seamus-oregan-checks-wellness-program-seeking-212609074.html

Guess he was seeing himself and projecting self-loathing.

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 125,045
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,786
  • It's all good
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #30 on: January 05, 2016, 21:45:40 »
Guess he was seeing himself and projecting self-loathing.

 Are we talking about Rocky Mountains here?

Just Saying.
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline S.M.A.

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,515
TransCanada sues US govt. over XL pipeline cancellation
« Reply #31 on: January 07, 2016, 14:54:03 »
So they're willing to spend however much in legal fees against the US government itself?

Yahoo News

Quote
TransCanada sues U.S. over Keystone XL rejection, seeks damages
[Reuters]
By Nia Williams and Roberta Rampton

CALGARY/WASHINGTON, Alberta (Reuters) - TransCanada Corp sued the U.S government on Wednesday to reverse President Barack Obama's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline, calling his decision unconstitutional.

TransCanada also sought $15 billion in a separate action under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), saying the pipeline permit denial was "arbitrary and unjustified." The company's lawsuit in federal court in Houston does not seek legal damages but wants the permit denial invalidated and seeks a ruling that no future president can block construction.

Obama rejected the cross-border crude oil pipeline last November, seven years after it was first proposed, saying it would not make a meaningful long-term contribution to the U.S. economy.

(...SNIPPED)

« Last Edit: January 07, 2016, 15:01:52 by S.M.A. »
Our Country
--------------------------------
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves."   - Lao Zi (老子)
-------------------------------------------
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm."
- Winston Churchill

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,215
Re: TransCanada sues US govt. over XL pipeline cancellation
« Reply #32 on: January 07, 2016, 15:10:07 »
So they're willing to spend however much in legal fees against the US government itself?

Yahoo News

Millions in legal fees could translate into billions in compensation so...
Optio

Offline Canuck_Jock

  • New Member
  • **
  • 600
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 42
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #33 on: January 11, 2016, 12:22:09 »
Aye, I admit it, I accidentally read the Toronto Red Star. Gotta stop it, not good at all for my blood pressure. 

Anyhow, I think Canadian journalism has sunk to a new low...or has it?

It seems Mt Salutin would like Canada to revert to Year 0; no kultur, no history, no politics that aren't of the extreme left. Apparently, the last PM was way to 'militaristic' (pssst, looking from across the Atlantic, I think Tony Bliar was more right wing than SH) and Canada also has a post-imperial hangover with the monarchy.

So, is this article drivel written by a smarmy liberal gobshite, or an erudite expression of contemporary Canadian thought?  I await an answer with trepidation....



Canada, the country that nationalism side-swiped: Salutin
As the last federal election showed, the real strength of Canadian nationalism might be its relative weakness.

I write as a Canadian nationalist. Along with others, I’ve done what I could to build a national sense here: culturally, politically, economically. We excavated and created heroes and celebrated resistance to imperial forces, British or American. I won’t say we failed but success was limited. That truncated level of success may be an asset now. The weakness of our nationalism could even be its strength. I say this in light of the last election, and the global refugee crisis.

In terms of typical nationalist reactions to the Mideast refugee crisis, it’s as though we’re running in the opposite direction from the rest of the west. Not xenophobic and restrictive, like the UK, U.S., Hungary et al. Yet our contrary, tolerant, welcoming reaction is seen here as nationalist.
The Anglo-Irish scholar, Benedict Anderson, who died last month aged 78, wrote a book on nationalism with a title that can rearrange your sense of reality: Imagined Communities. Unlike religious identities, which are ancient, he said, national identities are recent and modern. But they imagine they’re ancient and discover roots of all sorts to prove it. Then people live and willingly die based on their passionate identification with those imaginary communities.

Anderson felt this could be for good or ill. He knew it had ugly potential on the racism spectrum. But he wrote at a time (1983) when nationalism was also used to mobilize people against domination — as, say, nationalism in Vietnam built resistance to colonialism. Since this nationalism thing couldn’t be “patented,” it was “available for pirating” in numerous versions.

That included Canada which pirated a pretty modest form. Margaret Atwood, for instance, proved Canada existed by proving it had its own literature which was proved by a common (and highly minimalist) theme: Survival. Pierre Berton tried to show we not only had a history to be proud of, but it was also “colourful” versus dull — just like other nations.

These efforts had effects and still do (Oh look, Justin Bieber won a People’s Choice award). They won some victories outside the cultural realm but tended to fall short economically and politically, in battles like Canada-U.S. free trade.

Here’s where it starts to get paradoxical. Stephen Harper, during his reign, tried to become the voice of Canadian nationalism in the traditional, exclusivist sense. He promoted militarism, including symbols like the Highway of Heroes, and shopworn imperial imagery like the Royal Family. He promoted undercurrents of xenophobia, nativism and racism in his policies toward immigrants and especially refugees, who were despicably treated. These became overcurrents during the election, with his attacks on Muslim headgear, the “barbaric cultural practices” snitch line and revocable citizenship.

What’s fascinating is that Justin Trudeau didn’t oppose him by declaring he was anti-nationalist, as you’d have to in, say, Serbia or Hungary. He fought back as a Canadian nationalist, defining it in terms of tolerance or even, the glory of diversity — a sharp rebuttal to most contemporary nationalism. It also had weird echoes. Justin’s dad, Pierre, rejected Quebec nationalism as parochial but embraced Canadian nationalism as a way to fight it. When he ran against Tory leader Joe Clark in 1979, Trudeau père scorned Clark’s notion that Canada was just a “community of communities,” for being wishy-washy and contentless.

Yet that’s essentially what his son endorsed. Now picture Harper: beaten not only by the son of his most reviled Canadian predecessor; but by the son’s embrace of the vision of Harper’s most loathed Conservative antecedent, Joe Clark. It’s beyond Shakespearean. Who says we don’t have a colourful history?
If we’d been more successful in creating a robust, conventional Canadian nationalism, who knows — the country mightn’t have as handily beaten back the nasty nativism cultivated by Harper. It could have provided unintended grist for his mill. So the real strength of Canadian nationalism might turn out to be its relative weakness. We’re the land that nationalism side-swiped. Lucky us.

In his book, Benedict Anderson quoted Walter Benjamin’s passage on the angel of history — based on a Paul Klee print. The angel stands looking backward sadly as history’s failures and disasters pile up at his feet. So, as history’s wind blows him into the future, he can’t see, behind him, the progress that may be about to arrive. You could call it, back to the future, in a literal sense.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 453,050
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,050
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2016, 12:41:20 »
Here is a link to that article. Canuck_Jock: please see this which is the advice of a lawyer to help us to help the site owner stay on the right side of the Copyright Act.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Canuck_Jock

  • New Member
  • **
  • 600
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 42
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2016, 13:22:20 »
ER Campbell: thanks for the top tip!

Offline Rocky Mountains

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 4,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 281
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #36 on: January 12, 2016, 12:31:57 »
Here’s where it starts to get paradoxical. Stephen Harper, during his reign, tried to become the voice of Canadian nationalism in the traditional, exclusivist sense. He promoted militarism, including symbols like the Highway of Heroes, and shopworn imperial imagery like the Royal Family. He promoted undercurrents of xenophobia, nativism and racism in his policies toward immigrants and especially refugees, who were despicably treated. These became overcurrents during the election, with his attacks on Muslim headgear, the “barbaric cultural practices” snitch line and revocable citizenship.

That's the Lefty narrative - not to be confused with the truth.  Canadian participation in The Afghan War was start by the Liberals and ended by the Conservatives.  The Highway of Heroes was named by the Liberal government of Ontario following popular demand.  I am not sure how imagery of the Queen, our head of state is any more Conservative than Liberal, at least by anything they actually say.  Racism toward immigrants?  The Conservatives let in a lot more non-European immigrants than the Liberals ever did albeit for economic reasons rather than some imagined touchy-feely charitable reason.  Also the Muslim headgear restriction was almost universally supported by Canadians.

Offline Kilo_302

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 5,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 522
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #37 on: January 12, 2016, 16:35:31 »
Now THIS is pretty rich. I agree and think that the full report should be released (we shouldn't have done this deal in the first place) but do the Conservatives think Canadians are utter pylons? That we'll forget the last 12 months?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-press-liberal-government-to-justify-saudi-arms-deal/article28125150/recommendi/

Quote
Mr. Clement acknowledges that the Conservatives are asking for information they refused to release while in office under Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

But he says the new leadership of the Conservative Party feels differently.

“This is a [Liberal] government that has promised more transparency. I think that is consistent with the times in which we live,” Mr. Clement said.

“So don’t take the signal from the last government. If you want to be true to your principles and values, which the Conservative Party under new leadership shares, let’s move forward.”

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 177,735
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,518
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #38 on: January 12, 2016, 16:45:41 »
Now THIS is pretty rich. I agree and think that the full report should be released (we shouldn't have done this deal in the first place) but do the Conservatives think Canadians are utter pylons? That we'll forget the last 12 months?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-press-liberal-government-to-justify-saudi-arms-deal/article28125150/recommendi/

Just doing their job ..... Opposing.  You remember.
Over, Under, Around or Through.
Anticipating the triumph of Thomas Reid.

"One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”  - James Lovelock

Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. [Ambrose Bierce, 1911]

Offline MARS

  • Mentor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 52,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 757
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #39 on: January 12, 2016, 16:47:29 »
Now THIS is pretty rich. I agree and think that the full report should be released (we shouldn't have done this deal in the first place) but do the Conservatives think Canadians are utter pylons? That we'll forget the last 12 months?


Agreed.  I can't imagine what polling data they might have found that suggested this is a good idea.  bizarre.

Sure, they are in Opposition, but why not just let the LPC twist in the wind on it?  "Too soon" would be my take on this strategy.

"Managers do things right; Leaders do the right thing"

Offline Rocky Mountains

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 4,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 281
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #40 on: January 12, 2016, 17:58:59 »
What are we - Americans who abandon their allies?  Mind you, with the Saudis, we are never really sure which side they are on.  It bothers my conscience nary a bit whether people are killed with the aid of Canadian, American, Russian or French low-tech vehicles.  They are just as dead.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 453,050
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,050
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #41 on: January 12, 2016, 18:41:18 »
Message for the CPC:



It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 380,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 20,673
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #42 on: January 12, 2016, 18:50:43 »
Now THIS is pretty rich. I agree and think that the full report should be released (we shouldn't have done this deal in the first place) but do the Conservatives think Canadians are utter pylons? That we'll forget the last 12 months?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-press-liberal-government-to-justify-saudi-arms-deal/article28125150/recommendi/

Quote
Mr. Clement acknowledges that the Conservatives are asking for information they refused to release while in office under Prime Minister Stephen Harper.  But he says the new leadership of the Conservative Party feels differently ... “So don’t take the signal from the last government. If you want to be true to your principles and values, which the Conservative Party under new leadership shares, let’s move forward.”
A pretty refreshingly frank (if more than a bit hypocritical) dig by Tony Clement towards the former skipper of the ship -- "hey, you must have us confused with those OTHER Tories that just left!"

#eatingtheirownalready   :facepalm:
“Most great military blunders stem from the good intentions of some high-ranking buffoon ...” – George MacDonald Fraser, "The Sheik and the Dustbin"

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,397
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #43 on: January 12, 2016, 21:02:31 »
The CPC are secretive, which in itself is no secret.  Should the Opposition be holding the new government to a CPC standard or a LPC standard?
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

Omnia praesidia vestra capta sunt nobis.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

"But injustice is a rule of the service, as you know very well; and since you have to have a good deal of undeserved abuse, you might just as well have it from your friends."  - The Ionian Mission, by Patrick O'Brian.

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,215
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #44 on: January 13, 2016, 00:16:36 »
Heard Tony Clement on As It Happens.    ???  Not sure what the game plan is here.
Optio

Offline Kilo_302

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 5,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 522
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #45 on: January 13, 2016, 08:31:59 »
What are we - Americans who abandon their allies?  Mind you, with the Saudis, we are never really sure which side they are on.  It bothers my conscience nary a bit whether people are killed with the aid of Canadian, American, Russian or French low-tech vehicles.  They are just as dead.

Right but remember we're apparently in the game of trying to defeat ISIS. There's quite a bit of evidence out there that the Saudis armed and trained them, and are STILL heavily involved. Obviously our LAVs won't be going that route, but should we be selling weapons to a country that is actively supporting the other side in a war we're in?

Not to mention that the LAVs will most likely be used to quell internal opposition and uprisings in neighbouring countries (Canadian vehicles were used in Bahrain in 2011).

This puts us in a very awkward position if and when the House of Saud collapses. It also guarantees whoever replaces them will not be very friendly towards Canada.

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 101,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,234
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #46 on: January 13, 2016, 09:00:03 »
We are Westerners- in that part of the world, that puts us in an awkward position, no matter what.

I am super fine with selling arms to the Saudis (or anyone else from that part of the world) that wants them. The jobs building those vehicles might as well go to London. If not , they will go to Paris. Or Moscow.

It is fun watching the Liberals twist in the wind over this, however.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 177,305
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,986
  • Freespeecher
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #47 on: January 13, 2016, 09:53:06 »
That's the Lefty narrative - not to be confused with the truth.  Canadian participation in The Afghan War was start by the Liberals and ended by the Conservatives.  The Highway of Heroes was named by the Liberal government of Ontario following popular demand.  I am not sure how imagery of the Queen, our head of state is any more Conservative than Liberal, at least by anything they actually say.  Racism toward immigrants?  The Conservatives let in a lot more non-European immigrants than the Liberals ever did albeit for economic reasons rather than some imagined touchy-feely charitable reason.  Also the Muslim headgear restriction was almost universally supported by Canadians.

And as an interesting twist, in the January 11 dead tree edition of the Natinal post, there is a small article on CPC polling for tax cuts prior to the election. Evidently, support for these cuts was fairly high (up to 70% for some cuts) that the CPC was confident that that issue would be firmly in their hands. Since tax cuts and increasing savings vehicles is not on our horizon any time soon (and any smoke and mirrors will certainly be overwhelmed by the effects of tax and fee increases to pay for "Climate Change"), I'll see if I can find an e version to post, just for the record. (Harper had polls backing his tax cuts. Mark Kennedy, National Post Jan 11 2016 page A4)
« Last Edit: January 13, 2016, 10:18:01 by Thucydides »
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 453,050
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,050
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #48 on: January 13, 2016, 10:06:18 »
We are Westerners- in that part of the world, that puts us in an awkward position, no matter what.

I am super fine with selling arms to the Saudis (or anyone else from that part of the world) that wants them. The jobs building those vehicles might as well go to London. If not , they will go to Paris. Or Moscow.

It is fun watching the Liberals twist in the wind over this, however.


I agree with all three of your points ...

But, regarding the last one: we should let the media take the pot shots, as they are already doing. It is unseemly, to say the least, hypocritical in reality, for Tony Clement to be taking the shots he has, given that he and Rona Ambrose and much of the CPC front bench were ministers in the Harper government.

I repeat ...

               
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,215
Re: Politics in 2016
« Reply #49 on: January 13, 2016, 10:27:59 »
Plus, the story is now turned into a story about their hypocrisy.  This was a bad call.  Best they just let it die and leave it be.  Or let the NDP handle the criticism.
Optio