I Hate This Campaign Already...

[jpinkster]

I'm going to commit a major faux pas and talk about politics on a fishing forum.

 

I'm personally appalled by the horrible options we have before us in this election. Want Canadians to get more involved? Offer us something better. On top of that, who calls an 11 week campaign at the beginning of August. I cannot think of a more horrid thing to do to your volunteers.

 

Here's some of my musing on our options:

 

What bothers me about all of the key parties/leaders:
The CPC has a horrible environmental track record. Removing protected status of hundreds of lakes and rivers? Good call. Keep in mind water is our most precious resource. This I cannot forgive.
The LPC has a leader that continually proves he isn't mature enough to work for government, let alone run it. Stop swimming in your father's wake and prove that you have some ideas to bring to the table.
As an Albertan I just can't trust the NDP. Mulcair has had some horrible things to say about Alberta and the oil sands. If Alberta/Sask are the economic drivers of this country, I worry what would happen to the Canadian economy under an NDP government.
What I like about the key parties/leaders:
Harper is the devil we know. He was handed a pretty tough deck, and the ship hasn't sunk. I am also greatly appreciative of the recent infrastructure funding announcements in Calgary. Call it vote buying, I don't really care.
The LPC offer an alternative to the CPC government without taking us all the way into wacky land.
Thomas Mulcair has a beard.

[BurningChrome]

If Alberta/Sask are the economic drivers of this country

That won't be the case if the price of oil stays where it's at. And that'll be our undoing since the Harper regime has only done things to benefit the O&G industry. Even if you dislike him, Mulcair was absolutely right when he said that Canada has Dutch disease.

 

If Layton was still around I'd vote NDP in a heartbeat. Right now I'm still undecided between Libs, NDP, and Green. CPC has never been an option for me.

[jpinkster]

Even if you dislike him, Mulcair was absolutely right when he said that Canada has Dutch disease.

So you're saying I should invest in tulips?

[BurningChrome]

So you're saying I should invest in tulips?

And bicycles.

[jgib01]

I'm going to commit a major faux pas and talk about politics on a fishing forum.

 

Say it isn't so... you writing about politics on FFC?!!

 

And bicycles.

 

And a "pannenkoek huis" (those things are hella good by the way). My apologies to the Dutch, but I tried my best with google to get spellings.

[jpinkster]

Say it isn't so... you writing about politics on FFC?!!

 

 

And a "pannenkoek huis" (those things are hella good by the way). My apologies to the Dutch, but I tried my best with google to get spellings.

 

I'm Dutch heritage on both sides of the family, you did fine

[DonAndersen]

To suggest that Stevie is the best of a bad lot when Stevie came in first as the worst PM since the second war really scares me.

Lizzie May for PM has a good ring.

And I always vote for losers.

Any suggestions who you wish to go down in flames?

 

Don

[Vagabond]

Worst PM according to who Don?

Oh let me guess,the Libtard/commie/hippy attack ad coalition,lol.

 

I've got to admit,I'm very dissapointed with the Cons environmental record,but the others will bankrupt the country,they're anti-oil,anti-Alberta,and just plain bad for bizness.Imho,Canada has prospered under this govt for the most part,including getting us thru the last recession in good shape.Its no fault of Harper's that the WORLD oil price has tanked.....and on national security/anti-terror measures and dealing with threats.....no brainer,Stevo is the only one with balls enuf to use the M word and call it like it is.......not to mention the Cons are the ONLY party not vowing to take my guns away.

[dryfly]

"Removing protected status of hundreds of lakes and rivers?"

 

Can someone provide a citation for the laws that were changed to cause this to happen?

[jpinkster]

Check out this article:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/robin-rowland/navigable-waters-protection-act-media-fail-idle-no-more_b_2356595.html

[dryfly]

Thanks, but I never asked for a "newspaper" article. Mainstream media (MSM) in Canada (CBC, Global, CTV, Globe and Mail, The Calgary Herald, The Edm Journal, Toronto Red Star, most other newspapers, HuffPo etc etc ad nauseam lean left and hate the right.There are dozens of anti CPC articles on a lot of subjects. Included are guns, aboriginal affairs, women's issues, gay rights, "the environment," climate (yawn...), forestry, GMOs, food production, health care... all real or imagined issues that the CPC have pretty much wasted or destroyed or otherwise messed up according to MSM...or so you'd believe.

 

Canadian MSM could not report factually on most subjects any more than they could pour piss out of a boot with the instructions written on the sole. But I digress ...

 

Please cite legislation and specific clauses that have changed in a way to make that make rivers and lakes less protected than previously.

 

One thing you all should be aware of: for every BILLION dollars Canadians piss away pretending we can do something about climate change, that one billion dollars is taken away from real environmental protection. It is a criminal disgrace that enviro groups (Pembina Inst, Greenpeace, Sierra Club, Forest Ethics, Tides Canada, Suzuki Foundation) are forcing such a waste of money on our society. There is only so much tax money to go around and the more we waste on climate the more the environment will suffer. Ironic wot?

 

Regards and thanks,

 

Clive

[Vagabond]

Well Clive,as posted previously,as a blue bleeding Conservative,I'm not at all impressed with the party's environmental record,and the Omnibus Bill did in fact gut and take the teeth out of the Fisheries Act,most notably,protection of habitat legislation,essentially paving the way for pipelines and resource extraction industries to operate under far less scrutiny and with far less regard for any aquatic habitats in question.

A necessary evil to get Alberta oil flowing to 3 coasts perhaps....and while I'm not anti-pipeline per se......doesn't mean I agree with these blatantly obvious moves to appease big oil.

I'm still a supporter of Conservative ideologies and all.....but they did set back freshwater habitat protection in Canada by 50 years at least,much to the disgust of many anglers,outdoors people,and environmentalists.I know of many salmon conservation activists back east that will not vote blue this time around based on that issue alone.

Myself...well.....I like fish....but I love guns,lol.I also very much enjoy being gainfully employed with expendable income in my pocket within a strong Albertan economy,which is not on any priority list of the Libtards nor Dipshits.

[DonAndersen]

Vagabond,

 

For a view of Harpers standing as compared to other PM's, it is worth your while to read:

 

http://www.unifor.org/sites/default/files/documents/document/909-harper_economic_critique_eng_0.pdf

 

I found it surprising that The Cons keep telling us that they are such great economic wizards.

 

Don

 

[Vagabond]

Really Don?

Do you honestly expect me to read 66 pages of union propoganda,prepared by the very NDP friendly CAWU and walk away with an unbiased perspective??

......did I mention I love my guns?

BTW....Registration is the first step towards Confiscation.

 

[albertatrout]

"Removing protected status of hundreds of lakes and rivers?"

 

Can someone provide a citation for the laws that were changed to cause this to happen?

 

I've noticed lots of NDP propaganda stating this. What changed was the navigable waters act which has nothing to do with fish habitat. The changes in the fisheries act were related to reducing infrastructure costs in creeks with minimal fish potential (minnows). Prior to the changes, culverts had to be designed for fish passage at flood flows even in fishless systems/ many wheat fields. If folks talked to people that work with the legislation, they would know very little changed in systems with any sport fish potential whatsoever. Some of the previous rules were so precautionary it was driving up costs to insane levels in many counties/ jurisdictions. A culvert passable to pike during a 10 year flood event 30 km from the nearest pike wasn't very good legislation neither.

 

I'm thinking dryfly knows this, but many others don't do their own research.

[DonAndersen]

Vagabond,

 

I've owned firearms for many years. Both restricted and non-restricted. Like you I see little use for the long gun registry.

However, to hang the course of my country on a single issue just plain scares me. I had coffee with some fellows I've known for years and the only thing they were concerned with is their guns. Holly crap - if that doesn't scare the crap outta me!

And you should really read the provided document. The information is well researched.

What really concerns me is the blatant lying by all political parties. Is there no where one can get the facts rather than "spins"?

There is no question that the Cons ballyhoo about the economy is just plain BS. The other parties are just as bad.

 

Don

 

 

 

 

[Vagabond]

Yes Don,they're all crooks....but the Cons are the ONLY party not vowing to take my guns away.

I'm not a single issue voter,but that's an important one to me,especially so in these uncertain times when we may find ourselves in a SHTF scenario.

I don't trust any government that doesn't trust it's citizens with firearms.

.....and if Firearms legislation was a non-issue,I'd still vote blue.

[DonAndersen]

And to keep it upbeat, I give you....

 

http://thelapine.ca/wear-an-i-love-harper-button-get-a-free-tim-hortons-coffee-timbits-starting-today/

 

I'm sure the there are no "I love Harper buttons" and while the Cons OKing Timmies being sold to the southerners, several CDN's no

longer drink their offerings.

 

 

Don

[ÜberFly]

Dave, maybe it's time you move to the good ''ol U S of A!!

 

Yes Don,they're all crooks....but the Cons are the ONLY party not vowing to take my guns away.

I'm not a single issue voter,but that's an important one to me,especially so in these uncertain times when we may find ourselves in a SHTF scenario.

I don't trust any government that doesn't trust it's citizens with firearms.

.....and if Firearms legislation was a non-issue,I'd still vote blue.

[Vagabond]

 

Dave, maybe it's time you move to the good ''ol U S of A!!

Haha Pete,better yet......maybe it's time more CDNS adopt an American gun attitude.

Amend the Charter with a RIGHT to bear arms,and have the media stop playing to irrational fears and promoting the lefty liberal anti-gun agenda.

Drunk driving kills and injures more CDNS every week then firearms do in a year.....let's ban cars!

Hell,let's ban booze while were at it.

Obesity and heart disease kills more CDNS EVERY DAY then firearms kill in 10 YEARS....let's ban forks and hamburgers,fries n gravy!!!

[Vagabond]

 

And to keep it upbeat, I give you....http://thelapine.ca/wear-an-i-love-harper-button-get-a-free-tim-hortons-coffee-timbits-starting-today/I'm sure the there are no "I love Harper buttons" and while the Cons OKing Timmies being sold to the southerners, several CDN's no longer drink their offerings.Don

Dammit....I'm genuinely dissapointed that this is merely satirical spoof news....I want one of those buttons!!I love my Timmies and my guns and my blue blooded redneck MP/PM!!

[ÜberFly]

Don' t forget smoking

 

Haha Pete,better yet......maybe it's time more CDNS adopt an American gun attitude.

Amend the Charter with a RIGHT to bear arms,and have the media stop playing to irrational fears and promoting the lefty liberal anti-gun agenda.

Drunk driving kills and injures more CDNS every week then firearms do in a year.....let's ban cars!

Hell,let's ban booze while were at it.

Obesity and heart disease kills more CDNS EVERY DAY then firearms kill in 10 YEARS....let's ban forks and hamburgers,fries n gravy!!!

[Vagabond]

 

Don' t forget smoking

I'm trying bud.....even have a rock solid quit date picked out now.

[ÜberFly]

Wasn't a dig Dave, you just listed every other vise but forgot that one:)

 

I'm trying bud.....even have a rock solid quit date picked out now.

[WyomingGeorge]

Hey gents, lively discussion. And before I weigh in, let me just remind everyone that I'm not "from" Wyoming, I just go "to" Wyoming and couldn't think of a better forum name for my silly self.

 

Regarding the gutting/non-gutting of protection for lakes and streams, it might be worth recalling that, historically, there was a gigantic pile-on of regulations by previous Liberal federal governments. It could be argued that removing some of these regulations isn't loosening things, appeasing the oilpatch, etc., merely restoring balance.

 

Also, there's the small matter, and I only mean that half-sarcastically, because in today's era of the gigantic administrative state, it really is considered small, namely the Constitution. And it assigns primary responsibility for lands, forests, waters, the environment, wildlife and property in general to the provinces. The giant federal pile-on of environmental regulations beginning in the early 90s was done largely under the cover of trans-boundary or navigable waters authority. So, any stream that crossed a border was suddenly fair game to the feds, and any stream that was "navigable" by birchbark canoe was subjected to...federal fisheries regulation.

 

Constitutionally, it's perverse. Functionally, a given set of new federally imposed regulations may be to people's liking if they happen to like their federal government but don't like their provincial one. But, be careful what you wish for, as the tables can always turn. Personally I'd rather keep the authority to make laws and regulations such as these close to home, where there's at least a chance of local people having some influence. So the feds backing out of this doesn't mean these things can't have the heck regulated out of them, it just means the regs will have to come from the province.

 

Lastly, to say that Alberta's economy will go down only because of the oil price is providing too much cover to the NDP. The capital investment strike began the morning after the provincial election. I know this personally, as a client cancelled plans to take his private company public. So, $400 million that would have come into Alberta from Toronto, NY, Miami and the U.K. even with $50 per barrel oil stayed away purely because of the provincial NDP.

 

They can go ahead and raise royalties all they want, but a 100 percent royalty rate on a well that doesn't get drilled raises exactly how much for the public treasury? Correct: zero. And a higher corporate tax rate on a company that's losing money raises how much? Less than zero, as they'll be paying back the company's tax installments, and this year's losses can be used to offset taxes in future profitable years.

 

It doesn't require NDPers to destroy an industry. We saw it before with the PCs under Stelmach. He raised royalties to get "our fair share" and mineral lease auctions ("land sales") collapsed from $5 billion per year to $1 billion, and drilling rates fell precipitously.