The Shotgun Blog
« Disaster | Main | More reaction to the speech »
Thursday, April 21, 2005
"I guess we should give him another chance . . ."
The phrase heard at millions of Ontario dinner tables this evening.
Posted by Kevin Libin on April 21, 2005 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d83458629169e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "I guess we should give him another chance . . .":
» Prediction from small dead animals
I'll be the first to say this out loud. Print it out and stick it in a drawer. Paul Martin is facing a lose-lose situation, no matter when an election is held. The first is the obvious one - going... [Read More]
Tracked on 2005-04-21 9:24:44 PM
Comments
Not this time!
Posted by: Greg Staples | 2005-04-21 5:55:06 PM
The only reason anyone in Ontario needs to vote Liberal is to flip a big bird to the Westerners who never tire of slagging Ontario.
Posted by: bob | 2005-04-21 6:11:11 PM
Oh yes this time.
Ontario will never elect anyone who would dare challenge their supremacy.
The Tories, led by an Ontarian who *gasp* defected to Alberta, would do things like 1) tighten and enforce immigration laws, reducing the supply of cheap labor, 2) spend money outside of Ontario; and 3) improve relations with the dreaded US of A.
If Ontario is willing to put up with Chretien three times, Martin will be re-elected with a majority government. Kyoto will be enforced everywhere but Ontario. Ontario will be 100% responsible for the destruction of Canada.
Posted by: Scott | 2005-04-21 6:15:03 PM
We don't really slag Ontario out here, but slag the Gov who happens to be in Ontario, and buys off ON votes in every election.
Solution, stop being bought off, and will stop slaggen. It's either that, or ON will be supporting the rest of the country by themselves, as that would be the ultimate outcome of continuance.
Posted by: rob | 2005-04-21 6:22:36 PM
As noted, that was NOT a speech about the nation but about the Liberal Party. Martin had no right to ask for prime time television to make an election speech.
Second - so what, if he apologized. The one who should apologize is Chretien. And don't forget, Martin led his caucus in cheering Chretien when he thumbed his (golf)balls at Gomery and showed his contempt for the inquiry.
Third - note that Martin said he was suing to get back '40 million dollars'. The scam was for over 230 million.
Fourth - Martin is ignoring that Canadians DO already know the details and facts about the sponsorship. The inquiry is on television, all day every day. Is Martin implying that Canadians are too stupid to understand the evidence and must wait to be told what to think by Gomery?
Fifth - Martin is trying for time, time, time. Why? Because he wants to win the next election, and he wants the Evidential Phase of the Gomery inquiry to be over...so that it won't be on television every day...and there will be 'silence in the land'...while Gomery takes several months - possibly five or six - to write his report. Martin wants those six months of silence, hoping that people will forget. That's what he's after - those months of silence from the Gomery daily television evidence.
Six - he wants to blame the opposition for 'forcing' an election, ignoring that it's Liberal policies that are the problem.
So - I think that his use of prime time television for electioneering today was ..yet another Liberal scam. And, I think he's toast.
And do I think that the people who carried out the real scam, will suffer? No. Chretien and his cronies...they've made their millions. We won't get it back.
Posted by: ET | 2005-04-21 6:37:57 PM
I fail to see how Ontario is "bought off," what with the massive transfer payments.
There is a lot of talk about how little Ontario cares about or understands the rest of the country, but from what I hear from other provinces, they don't understand Ontario a bit. All I hear are half-baked myths and prejudices.
Also, you might want to realize that Ontario almost does in fact support the rest of the country.
BTW, I do not live in Ontario.
Posted by: bob | 2005-04-21 6:49:21 PM
No one bought off Ontario, but they have a dominance to maintain. The rest of Canada, particularly Alberta, suffers to pay Ontario's bills.
Ontario has the votes to ensure it has a virtual veto over all Canadian affairs. Nothing gets done without its approval. That would explain why things are a mess and Alberta is on the verge of secession.
An elected senate would eliminate this veto power, which is why it is a fantasy. So long as Ontario has complete dominance of Canada, there will be no change.
Alberta has to secede to protect its people from Ontario's corruption. It is a sad commentary when Alberta's relationship with the United States is far better than with Canada. Sad. Pathetic.
Posted by: Scott | 2005-04-21 7:14:32 PM
By bought off your assuming a monetary value, which is true in the end. When ON does not have to comply to the Can. Wheat Board, the manufacturing sector gets consessions, imigration is encouraged to settle there to keep a thumb on them, etc. etc., that's a buy off for votes, especially at election time.
As for your argument about ON pays for all of Can., I invite you to check on the above and this item, and you'll find that Alberta pays the highest per capita, 11 billion. There is not one Prov. supporting Can., there is 2, and the dependency of the others has to be retired. Please do check on the above for your own knowledge.
Posted by: rob | 2005-04-21 7:39:32 PM
Regarding how Ontarians vote: it is not substantially different from anywhere else in English Canada. Those who feel largely dependent on the government vote Liberal every time. And I mean "dependent" in the broadest sense: immigrants want to get their granny and all their nieces and nephews into the country; Franco-Ontarians want the bilingualism and especially all those government jobs to keep coming; government employees and those working in highly protected and subsidized industries (banks, media, insurance, heavy industry, pharmaceuticals, transportation, etc.) want more of the same. So the big cities go Liberal. A few of the government-dependent areas are so hard-core that they vote NDP - places where the unions are very fanatical and/or the welfare payments are very high. That leaves only the places where small, relatively unsubsidized and unregulated businesses thrive (where they used to anyways), which is in rural areas of Southern Ontario. And with Daltoon's Greenbelt, Kyoto, and many other programs, the federal Liberals and their provincial and municipal stooges are trying very hard to wrap up the last few areas of independent thinking into a tight ball of government regulation and subsidies.
And remember: this is no different than the West, except that Ontario has more cities and fewer rural ridings, so they send more Liberals to Ottawa and fewer Conservatives.
A lot of Ontarians may feel like it is time to punish the Liberals, but except for those rural areas hardly anyone in Ontario believes that they can stand up on their two feet any longer, without a Nanny Government to buy them jobs and educate their children. That's why I fear that PM Harper will get no farther in reforming government than to hire a few more accountants and fire a couple of Deputy Ministers ... and after a brief pause, the slide into a bankrupt socialist backwater will continue.
Posted by: Justzumgai | 2005-04-21 8:09:31 PM
Don't forget we in Ontario have Torstar on top of the CBC helping brainwash us. The brainwashing is so complete that we don't even know we're being brainwashed. (A few notable exceptions). I think it's all moot anyway, because Bloq is going to sieze the moment. I just here doodling little sketches to see how Old Glory looks with another row of stars...
Posted by: BrightLeaf | 2005-04-21 8:10:10 PM
Damn Justzumgai, couldn't ya wait till I finished my first drink, now I'm depressed again and will have to finish the bottle... ;-)
Posted by: rob | 2005-04-21 8:13:54 PM
Having just got off the phone with a very pro-Canadian anglophone friend currently living in Montreal, I can say from her perspective the greatest threat to Canadian unity is anyone still willing to let the Liberals run the government.
In her words, "If the Liberals get back in power, no matter how slim the minority, I'm going to vote to separate in the next referendum. If that happens, it's clear that not only are you in a different country, you're on a different planet."
Posted by: Wendy | 2005-04-21 8:32:25 PM
Sorry 'bout dat.
There is one ray of hope, which I decided to edit out at the end. Separate, independent pieces of Canada will be much less able to borrow money from Wall Street (or from China) to fund their socialist utopiae, and so would have a lot less ability to keep their friends on the dole and their enemies bent over the rack. They will also lack a federal government to milk, or to blame for the failure of their loser welfare programs.
The best kind of breakup would be one in which no one gets killed, and the national debt is renounced. That would let my kids off the hook for all that debt which was run up paying for their parents' and grandparents' 40-year holiday from the laws of economics. Getting burned on Canadian federal debt would also make it harder for lenders to believe the breakaway republics' pleas for a few billion dollars "just to tide us over".
So you see, there is always some hope for a better tomorrow.
Posted by: Justzumgai | 2005-04-21 9:03:36 PM
If the Lib's get back in with any kind of power, the breakup is a given. Might be the best thing that ever happened...total decentralization.... the whole country would have to grow up and face the reality of work.....what a concept..
Posted by: rob | 2005-04-21 9:21:04 PM
Since Alberta already paid $100 billion involuntarily in the National Energy Policy, we can secede immediately. We can even say we paid Saskatchewan and Manitoba's shares as well.
Ontario should bear the burden of the "national" debt which they ran up. Whenever I hear of their whining about how Ottawa owes them, I laugh. They have lived like kings on the backs of non-Ontarians and immigrants.
They can no longer just wave a flag in our faces and expect us to follow them. They do not have our best interests at heart. The time has come to reconsider Canada.
Posted by: Scott | 2005-04-21 9:32:00 PM
Ha...Scott,
I have Old Glory waven at my place... keeps the Moonbats out..
Call me radical, but ever since NEP, and being forced to find work way, way up north, I've had a total grudge for Libranos. They keep telling me to move, but I keep telling them "Up Yours", I was born here, and you ain't got no right to force me out of AB.
I hung it up when a customer in ONT told me that they can't deal with me cause westerners can't do anything right, and that ain't no joke. Were suppose to submit and just send the money, and become part of the welfare state, well forget it, I'll take up arms first.....
Posted by: rob | 2005-04-21 9:48:23 PM
rob: I hear you.
I have Old Glory in my home too. I will never fly Old Greedy (the Maple Leaf flag) because it represents Ontario and its privileged wealth.
Good Americans have risked their lives for their country - one of my proudest moments was visiting the Marine Corps War Memorial in Arlington, VA - wow.
No one ever died for Old Greedy. The only risks taken under it were by rich investors on Bay Street who were bailed out by the taxpayer if they lost money. Ontario is a society of wealthy white people, who exploit non-whites and non-Ontarians to get even wealthier.
President Bush has been a better friend to Alberta than Paul Millionaire, Chief Executive Officer of Canada, Inc. We can do business with the President, while Millionaire just sees us as a bank account for his rich friends, or a convenient scapegoat.
Sad. Truly sad. We do we secede?
Posted by: Scott | 2005-04-21 10:21:06 PM
I say it's time Albertans really jumped on this separatist bandwagon - We need to get on this gravy train!!! Over the last 25 years it's been a constant chant of Quebec's going to leave and look at all the money that was thrown their way. I say let's get our money back and history shows this to be the course of action that works best.
Posted by: sheila | 2005-04-21 10:29:54 PM
Shelia: there's one flaw in your argument.
Alberta doesn't need the money.
I'm prepared to call it even and leave on good terms.
Whether Ontario will see it that way remains to be seen. When some "terrorists" blew up a few mailboxes in Montreal in 1970, Pierre the Terrible suspended human rights and put Quebec under military occupation. (So much for his reputation as a defender of human rights - he should have been jailed for life).
I recommend we seek the support of the United States before we secede. Otherwise the Canadians will invade Alberta and it won't be pretty. They won't care about human rights or the Geneva Convention because they apply only to international conflicts. Remember: we're fighting for our homes, families and futures - they're fighting for corporate profit margins.
Posted by: Scott | 2005-04-21 10:39:38 PM
Scott, relax man! Canada invade Alberta? With what? Flaming prairie subs?
Posted by: BrightLeaf | 2005-04-21 11:38:40 PM
Greetings all. Alaska resident here. I just wanted to ask if it's really as bad as the impression I'm getting. Most US citizens have seen at most maybe one or two news commentaries about the adscam scandal.
I started reading about it very recently after hitting CQ's blog site and still trying to get a handle on it. Is there actually a growing feeling in Alberta for seperation?
Posted by: Joseph | 2005-04-21 11:56:28 PM
Greetings Joseph from Alaska.
So you've seen "one or two news commentaries"? Hey fellow Canadians! An American is looking at us!! Everybody on our best behaviour!
I'm not being sarcastic Joseph, it's just we sheep here in Canada really sit up and take notice when someone from the States hears about us.
Alberta seperation? Probably not, for if it ever comes to that the Feds (Libs) would feel compelled to send in the Army. Causing Albertans to fall on the floor in laughter.
My boss, an unrepentant Liberal, says the amount of money actually "stolen" isn't as much as the public believes and that the true number as quoted by the Auditor General is much lower. Of course when he said that, I immediately started ripping off all the computers in the place and loaded them in my truck. When he confronted me in the parking lot I told him the amount of computers I was actually "stealing" wasn't as much as he believed.
We Canadians can be such morons sometimes...Joseph, do yourself a favour and convince your government to invade us. Right...bloody....now.
C'mon, who'll stop you? Our Army???
Posted by: bstrang | 2005-04-22 12:26:37 AM
To Joseph - What Scott and Rob says represents a very small minority, even in Alberta. The majority are sick and frustrated with the imbalance of power in this country. But we won't separate because we're true blue "Canadians" (substitute words like "complacent" and "inactivist").
Posted by: Jack | 2005-04-22 12:39:08 AM
Brightleaf:
they'll use the same army that invaded Quebec in 1970, and was used to suppress the Mohawks in 1989.
Against a peaceful people like Albertans, who are trying to avoid open armed conflict, even a small force of Canada's soldiers would be a major obstacle to our independence.
I'd love a Lexington and Concord battle, maybe even a Bunker Hill, but right now we lack the ability to fight them in a long, drawn out conflict. Of course so was George Washington in 1776 as his army retreated from Brooklyn to the Delaware river near Trenton. He was able to strike at the right time. Will we be as lucky?
Posted by: Scott | 2005-04-22 12:45:49 AM
Key for the Conservatives will be to get the conservatives in Ontario to actually get out and vote. Last elections, most of them conceded ridings to Liberals so they didn't vote, or they were just happy not to have Chretien back.
I would say that the Libranos will take it up the ying yang hard in the Maritimes as Paulie screwed with Danny Williams mind for a while before finally caving on the resource deal. Also, Maritimes are generally a honest bunch who absolutely hate and I mean hate!! corruption. Look for a blue East Coast for sure.
Posted by: Suzie | 2005-04-22 1:14:05 AM
Come on. Canada send in the troops to stop Alberta from separating? What are we.......the USSR?
Of course, when the cash cow wants to leave the farm I guess there is reason to knock his ass out and sedate him to keep him happy.
Posted by: WidZ | 2005-04-22 1:14:17 AM
You folks from Alberta, if you separate, do you promise to take Screechin Annie with you?
Posted by: BrightLeaf | 2005-04-22 7:48:17 AM
Oh, poor, put-upon Alberta. Poor, stinking rich Alberta. Me, me, me!
Go, please leave, be my guest. You know damn well that no army is going to stop you - every province has the right to separate.
Alberta is a beautiful province with a fnatastic culture, but if we can get rid of a bunch of radical right-wingers, buh-bye!
Posted by: bob | 2005-04-22 7:52:34 AM
Brightleaf: Answer = NO! She and all the other whining Liberals will be sent back to Toronto where they will soon realize how good they had it in Alberta.
Posted by: Scott | 2005-04-22 8:39:49 AM
Ok, bob, I’ll bite.
What is so radical right-wing about wanting smaller, more accountable and less corrupt government, no federal intrusion on provincial matters, all ten provinces being treated equally and respectfully, a Triple E Senate, lower taxes, border security, a Supreme Court that interprets the law rather than making it, a clearly defined military role, and, since it’s our defining national characteristic, a workable, sustainable healthcare system?
Addressing these issues would stop most thoughts of separation dead.
Posted by: Kathryn | 2005-04-22 8:44:50 AM
Brightleaf wrote:
"You folks from Alberta, if you separate, do you promise to take Screechin Annie with you?"
You mean Carpetbagger Anne McLellan, the pride of Nova Scotia? - Annie never darkened the doors of our fair province until she took an "affirmative action" appointment to the U of A law school sometime in the mid-80's. Our greatest hope is she'll soon return to her roots.
Absolutely nothing wrong with moving around the country - done a little of it myself - but try to imagine growing up in Alberta and moving to Quebec in your late 30s and 5 or 6 years later beginning to describe yourself as a "strong voice for Quebec".
Posted by: firewalls 'r us | 2005-04-22 8:58:41 AM
Bob, I admire your display of Canadian courtesy!
The scandal engulfing the fiberals and our entire country may have one possible upside.
The next week is the time to tell your MP's what you think. It's time to demand an election.
If riding after riding after province after territory votes the corrupt liberals out of power and gives Harper and the Conservatives a mandate to clean up, then Canada has a chance to rebuild together.
Many of us want a reason to consider renewing our commitment to a unified Canada. The outcome of these scandals could give us one.
Posted by: PollyinAlberta | 2005-04-22 12:00:48 PM
After reading the comments here, as an American, I'd say, "Welcome to the U.S., Alberta." You'd all be better off to become a state in a country that actually has a future in this century, as opposed to being a province in the socialist backwater which has none that you guys are already a part of. Bring as many other Conservative provinces as you can; you'd all be more than welcome as a part of the Union.
Posted by: firebrand | 2005-04-22 11:06:02 PM
firebrand:
I've been saying that for years. Alberta has had a much better relationship with the US than we ever had with Canada. To them, we're just a bank account, and the reason they spend like crazy.
As a state, we'd be protected but also have large responsibilities. It won't be paradise with US federal taxes, new regulations, etc, but if Albertans can keep their jobs, homes, businesses, and futures intact, it is worth it.
Sure there are some people who will lament this, but it's all for the best interests of Albertans. Screw Canada, we're leaving and taking everything with us. They have no one to blame but themselves.
Posted by: Scott | 2005-04-22 11:35:53 PM
It's amazing how many "alberta seperatists" do a wonderful job at fetishizing the United States. Even flying the flag!
It's good circular logic. First of all you get ignored by the powerhouse which is the representitive votes of the roughly 10 million citizens of Ontario, so obviously Canada is a raw deal.
The US is so much better of course - Good luck not becomming Alaska part two when the 300 million people living down there do an even better job of completely ignoring you. After all their system is just so much better, just finally having the first presidential election in almost 20 years where the guy who got the most votes got to be president.
And of course corruption! Oh right, Well let's see how many americans we can find that would trade one Tom DeLay for 10 David Dingwalls any day of the week. Sponsorship scandel? Pocket change in Washington, even on a per capita basis.
The erroneous attitudes here are simply staggaring. Alberta is getting robbed. The province with no provincial debt and pumping money out of the ground. Ontario is taking all the money, the province with massive provincial debt that pays out 30 billion dollars more than it recieves. That money is going to pay debt off that was for Ontario's benefit anyways, thanks to the Liberal party's spending. Funny, I don't remember Mulrooney being much of a Liberal.
So people like Scott continue to masterubate on the stars and stripes and accuse Ontarians of being communists or something. Because of course, coaxing most of the auto industry out of michigan is so rabidly anti-capitalist. It certainly does signal the inevitable trip down the path of one of those backwards easern-european states. Socialist states; like Germany, that hellhole with all those dangerous BMW's screaming down the autobahn and all.
I just cannot understand how the US can be deified in the debate of governmental reform. The right gets ignored in Canada. The left gets ignored in the United States! Ask any american, the politics of the south have dominated those of the country for the entire centure. And there are a hell of alot more american leftists than Canadian rightists. There are a hell of alot more american leftists than Canadians period.
Hence the circle of logic, and the hyporcasy. Alberta is getting a raw deal because it's getting ignored. Majority ruling the minority in this power imbalance is unfair, but we'd be quite willing to join a power imbalance where our own idiologies ARE the repressive majority.
If there's one thing I'd grant, it's that Alberta has been ignored. Obviously that's true, there's no other way some of these crazy positions would have been able to fester if an outside source had actually thought about them. The craziest ideas always come about through copious ammounts of talking to yourself.
Posted by: AaronC | 2005-12-01 1:19:15 PM
First, I don't mind being ignored or neglected by either Ottawa or Washington. The tranquility is to be appreciated. It would be nice to be like Iowa or Wyoming and let the world pass by. Canada, however, forces us to be on our guard all the time, and fearful of our status. We make a contribution out of proportion to our size yet all we get are insults. It would be so nice to just live in peace. So go ahead and ignore us all you like - it's better than being abused.
Second, corruption exists in every government, so there's no use comparing the two. It's not nice, but this is the reason for enforcement. Chretien almost got away with Adscam because he beat up the enforcers. Delay and Cunningham didn't get away with it because the enforcement could not be tampered with. Score one for America.
Third, I appreciate America because it is Alberta's only alternative to Canada. I believe that independence is unworkable. We'd be caught between the US and Canada and being torn between them. Choose a side, and bear the responsibility, costs and benefits of it. It will probably suck either way, but such is life.
Posted by: Scott | 2005-12-01 2:08:01 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.