Election 2008

[mvdaog]

In alphabetical order...

[SanJuanWorm]

If the green party ever got in to power what would we all do for work after they bugger up industry?

[admin]

If the green party ever got in to power what would we all do for work after they bugger up industry?

 

People will need greener energy at some point and industry to supply it when the ground dries up. The oil has a limit.

[SanJuanWorm]

I know but gimme 25 more years sheesh.

 

 

Next poll on religion?

[rehsifylf]

There's an "other"? Or does that imply those folks are abstaining from voting for any of these flakes? If so, i need to change my vote.

[SanJuanWorm]

They're all bad aren't they.

 

I'll vote for whoever comes up with stiffer penalties for violent crimes. The justice system is a joke.

[darrinhurst]

They're all bad aren't they.

 

I'll vote for whoever comes up with stiffer penalties for violent crimes. The justice system is a joke.

Not likely to happen anytime soon, but I like the way you think.

[Weedy1]

I think the guys that voted for "other" are in fact are voting for this guy.

I love how he seems to be idolizing the maple leaf.

 

Here's his running mate's mug shot. I bet this guy knows how to make a profit.

 

Nothing like a couple of "home grown" boys eh?

[darrinhurst]

They're all bad aren't they.

 

I'll vote for whoever comes up with stiffer penalties for violent crimes. The justice system is a joke.

I'll even go one step further and say whoever aboloshes the Young Offenders Act will get my vote.

[Harps]

Anybody else get this in their emails:

Apparently somebody hacked ito his listserv...

 

Hi The Average Canadian,

 

Stephen Harper wanted to tell you...

 

My name is Stephen Harper. I am an ALBERTAN, here me roar! My goal is to make Canada America's 51st state and destroy health care that all Canadians cherish by infusing my propaganda with hard core ad hominem attacks. Please vote for me, because if you do, I promise you'll be able to vote for McCain 2012!

 

We are a tar sands level party, not a grass roots party. We consider anything with the word \"Green\" offensive, except for the almighty American dollar, which we hope to be able to implement in the coming months! We shall first have to make sure that American and Canadian jelly beans have the same standards, and then we shall proceed.

 

I hope everyone has a great weekend,

 

Take care,

 

Stephen \"I can lead you to Hell but not back\" Harper

 

If you agree click here.

 

The link doesn't work, but got a kick out of the message.

Followed by:

http://www.kosovocompromise.com

Serbia's Southern province of Kosovo declared independence in February 2008. Harper's government recognized it's independence. Does this lead to slowly accepting sovereignty for Quebec? Here's why Canada must follow International Law, the UN Chart, UNSC Resolution 1244 and the Final Helsinki Act of 1975.

 

concerned citizen

 

 

It was followed up with this:

Subject: Unauthorized Messages Purporting to be from Prime Minister Stephen Harper

 

This message is being sent to you on behalf of the Office of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Government of Canada.

 

As a subscriber to the Prime Minister's website (www.pm.gc.ca), you may have received what appear to be two emails from Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Please be advised that these were unauthorized uses of the Prime Minister's email listserv and do not represent the views of the Prime Minister or his Office. We regret these unauthorized communications.

 

The circumstances surrounding this unauthorized use of the Prime Minister's listserv are under investigation.

 

 

Of course... I'd like to point out the biggest mistake... Stevie Harper is not an Albertan... he just wants to be one.

 

Go Left!!!

[wongrs]

investing in renewables and energy efficiency means diversifying the economy (rather than putting all our eggs in one basket). there is a huge turnaround happening in the US and in Canada regarding regional regulations for greenhouse gases (whether you believe in GW or not). many jurisdictions are in the process of implementing caps or taxes on GHG emissions meaning that there will be a large uptake of renewable and energy efficiency technologies. if we invested in that sector now, then the entire continent would be looking to Canada to provide those solutions. creating the infrastructure, technology, training and consulting services in Canada would be a smart thing IMO. otherwise, the US will get it done and when Canada finally gets regulations in place, guess what, we'll be buying foreign technology which means a net export of $$$ leaving the country (which is exactly what harper was bitching about CDM carbon offsets).

 

it is a major opportunity that is going to pass us by.

 

it's ok, because we have a thousand years of coal and the largest heavy oil deposit in the world. we'll just deal with the heavy metals emissions, land use impacts and water consumption of those resources. that's a better strategy.

 

want to know what comes out of a coal plant every year? check this:

http://www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/querysite/facility...eport_year=2006

[Guest Sundancefisher]

investing in renewables and energy efficiency means diversifying the economy (rather than putting all our eggs in one basket). there is a huge turnaround happening in the US and in Canada regarding regional regulations for greenhouse gases (whether you believe in GW or not). many jurisdictions are in the process of implementing caps or taxes on GHG emissions meaning that there will be a large uptake of renewable and energy efficiency technologies. if we invested in that sector now, then the entire continent would be looking to Canada to provide those solutions. creating the infrastructure, technology, training and consulting services in Canada would be a smart thing IMO. otherwise, the US will get it done and when Canada finally gets regulations in place, guess what, we'll be buying foreign technology which means a net export of $$$ leaving the country (which is exactly what harper was bitching about CDM carbon offsets).

 

it is a major opportunity that is going to pass us by.

 

it's ok, because we have a thousand years of coal and the largest heavy oil deposit in the world. we'll just deal with the heavy metals emissions, land use impacts and water consumption of those resources. that's a better strategy.

 

want to know what comes out of a coal plant every year? check this:

 

What real alternative energy is out there? There is tons of value in R&D on new forms of energy but seriously...what energy out their is not harmful? I am not naive enough to think that every business has a special interest in bad mouthing the competition and ignoring their own faults. The oil industry accepts their faults and pays dearly in process, fees and regulation.

 

Wind power is proven to harm birds in the area and on migration. It also kills bats in very significant numbers. The foot print is huge and no one can hid the giant turbines from view! Farmers may get royalties for having them on their land but a number of companies will just buy the land cheap "cause it is windy and not of real vacation value" but do absolutely no environmental impact statements and care less about not seeing the deer and antelope frolicking around the dead birds and bats while the service men keep constant repairs on the machines.

 

Water power in the forms of dams have done historically the worst damage on the environment. No matter what you say unless you speed way beyond the justifiable economics you are going to harm fish, ground birds, amphibians, plants and mammals. What damage is okay depends upon ones personal agenda.

 

Solar is very expensive and also takes a huge foot print on an economic business model. Maybe with individual solar panels attached to roofs we can justify the cost and expense with more volume bringing the costs down. Even though the environmental damage associated with the batteries in such a system is harsh.

 

I personally like the idea of tidal power but costs are high and locations limited. Technology is also slowly being developed.

 

All I am saying is regardless of the bunk we say human induced global warming is and the FACT the earth has actually been cooler for the past 9 years is that technology to replace oil and gas and coal at a cost needed versus their own environmental consequences is no where near being justified.

 

I just wish everyone would try and be more careful on "wasting" the energy and doing all the reducing, reusing and recycling they can. Some of my friends are religious zealots when it comes to believing in global warming and yet they do not do the above, they drive lots of vehicles, never take public transit and have lots of expensive and fuel hungry toys and hobbies.

 

When a zealot gives up all cars planes and long trips, recycles everything, keeps the temperature in the house at 65 during the winter and wear a sweater instead, spends $80,000 retrofitting their home to total energy efficiency...then they have put their actions where their mouth is.

 

Until then...as per usual many bitchers rarely follow their own plan and mandate...

[wongrs]

What real alternative energy is out there? There is tons of value in R&D on new forms of energy but seriously...what energy out their is not harmful?

 

solar thermal, solar PV, wind and run of river are all options. some more expensive than others.

 

I am not naive enough to think that every business has a special interest in bad mouthing the competition and ignoring their own faults. The oil industry accepts their faults and pays dearly in process, fees and regulation.

 

entirely disagree with you. many parts of the oil industry have received a great deal in subsidies from the federal and provincial governments. look at the favourable tax scheme on oil sands or the built infrastructure for the logging industry. i'd like to see a report comparing renewables versus other industries that includes tax breaks, subsidies, built infrastructure AND EXTERNALIZED SOCIAL/ECONOMIC COSTS and compare costs on an apples-to-apples basis. if you have this, please share.

 

check out the health impacts of coal power in Ontario (yeah yeah, i know ontario sucks. chretian and trudeau suck blah blah blah):

-$10 BILLION in health care costs annually (Ontario Medical Association)

-2000 premature deaths per year

 

http://www.electricitychoices.org/coal.html

 

that doesn't even begin to address all the heavy metals and acid rain emissions that come out. if you were to try to 'remediate' all that crap, what do you think that would cost? the answer is a lot.

 

 

Wind power is proven to harm birds in the area and on migration. It also kills bats in very significant numbers. The foot print is huge and no one can hid the giant turbines from view! Farmers may get royalties for having them on their land but a number of companies will just buy the land cheap "cause it is windy and not of real vacation value" but do absolutely no environmental impact statements and care less about not seeing the deer and antelope frolicking around the dead birds and bats while the service men keep constant repairs on the machines.

 

Water power in the forms of dams have done historically the worst damage on the environment. No matter what you say unless you speed way beyond the justifiable economics you are going to harm fish, ground birds, amphibians, plants and mammals. What damage is okay depends upon ones personal agenda.

 

you are correct. wind mills harm various avian species. there is a lot of research going on currently in SW alberta. when the wind industry developed, like every other industry on the planet, it didn't take into consideration all environmental impacts. Take a look at altamont pass in california that was built on a bird migration route.

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Altamont_Pass,_California

 

it would be optimal to do extensive research on an area before a build. but these types of facilities WILL DEFINITELY have a negative impact on some wildlife but on a much smaller intensity than coal or oil/gas extraction. think about coal for a second. there's the coal mine (mine tailings, acid drainage, land impacts, water impacts) then the transport of coal to facility, combustion of coal and then the landfill of the leftover crap and heavy metals.

 

Solar is very expensive and also takes a huge foot print on an economic business model. Maybe with individual solar panels attached to roofs we can justify the cost and expense with more volume bringing the costs down. Even though the environmental damage associated with the batteries in such a system is harsh.

 

again, internalize all the costs and on a per MWH basis, i'm sure renewables will turn out way better. hell, solar PV is already somewhat comparable to the cost of conventional power generation as it is.

 

 

I just wish everyone would try and be more careful on "wasting" the energy and doing all the reducing, reusing and recycling they can. Some of my friends are religious zealots when it comes to believing in global warming and yet they do not do the above, they drive lots of vehicles, never take public transit and have lots of expensive and fuel hungry toys and hobbies.

 

When a zealot gives up all cars planes and long trips, recycles everything, keeps the temperature in the house at 65 during the winter and wear a sweater instead, spends $80,000 retrofitting their home to total energy efficiency...then they have put their actions where their mouth is.

 

i whole-heartedly agree with you. reducing your own impact should be the first step. anyone who preaches conservation and doesn't practice it is a hypocrite. perhaps al gore fits into this category, who knows. also, many retrofits are much simpler than the $80,000 figure you quoted. many pay for themselves over and over again. good examples are rechargeable batteries, CFL lightbulbs or LED light bulbs (yes, heavy metals can be dealt with), high efficiency furnaces, regular maintenance to your vehicle, weather proofing your house for excessive draft, shutting your curtains/blinds, buying a rain barrel, shutting down your beer fridge (models that are 15 years old can use 3X as much power to keep things cold), putting daily timers to shut lights down at night, timers to reduce heat while you sleep, low flow showerheads, insulating your hot water pipes etc etc etc. there are many things you can do around the house that will cost you practically nothing and can save a bunch of money and energy.

 

anyways, there is still value in electing a party that gives a damn about environmental issues. if you think the environment is important and you can't bring yourself to vote liberal or NDP, then there's still the green party available.

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Fair taxes are not tax breaks. Everyone always picks on the oil companies cause they seem to have the money. That business is extremely capital intensive and very very risky. I put this thought to you. If oil companies make such obsene amounts of money so easily...then why do the stock prices rise and fall. Why are you not invested 100% in them.

 

That industry gets treated like most other major industries employing huge numbers of people and spinning off billions of dollars to other industries. Without money being made in the oil and gas industry there will be not money to invest in other forms of power. If people think cratering the oil and gas industry...they are nuts.

 

As for the study you refer to it was 100% paid for by the power company in question. When those studies are quoted by oil industry types promoting their energy...people laugh at it. Should we not at least treat those studies fairly. Other studies by companies saying the do not hurt bats was totally refuted by an independent study recently out of the UofC.

 

In a nutshell, I do my best. I read your comment on insulating hot water pipes which I had not thought of. I have access to the ones in the basement and it sounds like a great idea. Where is the best place to find that kind of pipe insulation?

 

Cheers

 

Kevin

[wongrs]

Fair taxes are not tax breaks. Everyone always picks on the oil companies cause they seem to have the money. That business is extremely capital intensive and very very risky. I put this thought to you. If oil companies make such obsene amounts of money so easily...then why do the stock prices rise and fall. Why are you not invested 100% in them.

 

i don't invest in oil companies because many times they don't operate in a way that i would consider to be socially responsible. there have been many criticisms of large oil companies operating internationally (royal dutch shell in nigeria, exxon mobil in the middle east etc) where companies practices weren't very cool. corrupt officials and low taxes/royalties kept the money at the top without it trickling down to local economies. some of these companies have improved their practices in the past few years in light of development of corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies.

 

i also do not like some of the environmental impacts of development in north america. large scale land impacts of oil sands (both mining and insitu) as well as water impacts of coalbed methane extraction are good examples. i also do not invest in military or arms manufacturers.

 

i try not to invest in companies that i believe do not have an reputable CSR policy. i am currently investing in SRI (socially responsible investments). perhaps they don't have the same financial returns but as long as i can help it, i refuse to be a part of any organization where they have questionable operating practices in places with less stringent operating regulations. i'm not preaching, i'm just sharing my opinion.

 

if i made all my decisions based on how much money i could make/save, i would do a lot of things differently than i do. i would poach bull trout because it would save me money at the grocery store. i'd steal from anyone whenever it was convenient, i'd throw my used batteries in the trash, i'd evade taxes and i'd litter on the street if there was a cost of disposal. i don't do these things because life isn't entirely about money....more like it's about well-being.

 

btw, exxon mobil still hasn't paid their penalty for the valdez spill in the 80s to the US federal government....i don't think that's very cool. do you?

 

 

That industry gets treated like most other major industries employing huge numbers of people and spinning off billions of dollars to other industries. Without money being made in the oil and gas industry there will be not money to invest in other forms of power. If people think cratering the oil and gas industry...they are nuts.

 

i agree with you. the oil and gas sector in canada gives a lot of social/economic benefits in canada. currently though, oil sands projects have been criticized for drawing capital from the rest of the country because the projects are on such a large scale and the fact that there's only a limited amount of capital to invest. i do not want to see the oil and gas industry destroyed either.

 

 

As for the study you refer to it was 100% paid for by the power company in question. When those studies are quoted by oil industry types promoting their energy...people laugh at it. Should we not at least treat those studies fairly. Other studies by companies saying the do not hurt bats was totally refuted by an independent study recently out of the UofC.

 

studies rely heavily upon assumptions made. treating these studies fairly means having them peer reviewed. many industry studies don't even publish their assumptions or factors. look at the recent study that tried to claim that a hummer gives less emissions over it's life than a smaller car. absolutely ridiculous and refuted by an entire panel of life cycle assessment experts. that kind of *hit doesn't fly and it should be laughed at because it's a laughable study. you have to look at the motivations of the authors to make a sound judgement call.

 

wind turbine effects on avian species is highly dependent on location. location location location. some studies show low impacts to bats because there aren't many bats around. in SW alberta, there are local and migratory bats which is a problem. this is being studied by an ecology lab in UofC as you've noted. is a wind turbine worse than prairie grassland. yes if you look at that site only. but i like to think that a wind turbine killing some bats is better than a coal plant with it's emissions and mining displacing much more habitat on a per MWh basis.

 

In a nutshell, I do my best. I read your comment on insulating hot water pipes which I had not thought of. I have access to the ones in the basement and it sounds like a great idea. Where is the best place to find that kind of pipe insulation?

 

doing whatever you can within your means is good. even the david suzuki foundation would be happy with that. contrary to popular belief, they are not asking you to pack up your family and move into a cave.

 

you can read more about hot water home changes here:

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/consumer/your...m/mytopic=13060

 

it depends on how you heat your home and your hot water. the energy that dissipates will just go to the interior of your home so if you have a hot water heater and a gas heated home, then you're basically substituting electric heat for gas heat (which is probably more expensive). you'd be saving money but the total GJ delivered to your home would be the same.

 

the insulation is just styrofoam pipe wrap that should be available from a lot of places (home depot, crappy tire, home hardware etc).

 

getting back on topic, conservatives axed the energuide program because they thought that building energy efficiency wasn't an important program to keep. they then streamlined it and re-implemented a smaller scale program designed to do the same thing under the banner ecoEnergy. same program but much smaller. if you like energy efficiency, then conservatives are not where it's at IMO.

[duanec]

wow.

after watching both the debates i gotta wonder...

the 2 leaders that came across with the most intelligent w/questions and answers were green & bloc, both fringe party leaders [and they know it] who overall have platforms i can't support.

i have a big big hate on for the idiot in my riding, harper makes me ill and dion is just, well, dion and the green shift has it's points, but well...and layton is a characture of himself.

huh.

where's the natural law party when you need it?

some yogic flying on parliment hill and some old fashioned comic relief would be nice...

[Harps]

I wanna vote Bloc...

[PGK]

.

[Fisherwoman]

I will probably swallow my inner gun toting redneck and vote NDP.

 

Looky here

 

 

 

That one is useless as tits on a board!!! Good God...

[LynnF]

I will probably swallow my inner gun toting redneck and vote NDP.

 

Looky here

 

 

Wow...ya....let's elect that guy for our Prime Minister. No wait...let's give his party enough seats so that they can continue to use their wit and clear understand of everything to oppose all that makes sense.

 

Wow.

 

I'm voting for the pot party.

[dryfly]

People told me about this interview. Thanks for posting. Hair on CTV for showing it.

 

Dion is pathetic. And that he could lead a minority gov't next week... an embarrassment to all Canadians.

 

Pathetic.

 

Just pathetic.

 

Greens are no better...

Green Party in chaos over May's "secret deal" with Dion

 

As the Canadian Federal election enters its final days, news is emerging of a "secret deal" between Green Party leader Elizabeth May and Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion. Via Bourque Newswatch, "a secret deal has been cooked between Dion and Elizabeth May":

 

...which may explain why she has been meeting with "key Liberal organizers" and is now actively telling Green Party supporters to vote Liberal, of all things.

 

This, according to our Liberal insider, in exchange for a possible Senate seat and a place as Environment Minister in a Dion-led government. To be clear, Ms May's curious strategy of backing Dion is creating ill-will within her own party to the point that "a lot of Green candidates are upset", according to one national news report this morning. Add to that the fact Dion himself is urging Greenies to go red and join the Liberals.

 

There's more...

 

In recent hours, Bourque has heard from a number of senior political operatives, notably senior Green Party standard bearer David Chernushenko, who told Bourque that

 

"Integrity is when you make your actions consistent with your words and your promises. We all look for leaders with integrity. Too bad they are so hard to find. Green Party candidates should expect nothing but full and unwavering support from their leader. They have not received it. She has failed utterly in this one and most important obligation. To back them all to the end. In our 2006 leadership race, only when pushed by me, she promised Green Party members that of course she would back GP candidates 100 percent. Alas, the facts speak for themselves. If I were a candidate, I would be furious. I would feel let down by my leader when I needed her most. I wanted to stay out of this campaign entirely, but when I saw Green Party candidates, voters and donors being sideswiped, I could not stay silent. My friends and family deserve more respect. The Green Party is is not a "flag of convenience" to be raised and lowered on a whim."

 

Elizabeth May and the Green Party: politics as usual. Stephane Dion and the Liberal Party: desperation.

 

Update:

 

He [Dion] characterized Ms. May as “courageous”, saying that “for the sake of Canada she wants me as prime minister of Canada.”

Mr. Dion was speaking to a small but enthusiastic crowd of about 75 Liberals at a rally in the Ottawa area riding of Ottawa Orleans

 

OK, so we are in the final days of the election and all Dion can do is muster the support of 75 Liberals? in the nation's capital?

[Weedy1]

As the Canadian Federal election enters its final days, news is emerging of a "secret deal" between Green Party leader Elizabeth May and Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion. Via Bourque Newswatch, "a secret deal has been cooked between Dion and Elizabeth May":

 

...which may explain why she has been meeting with "key Liberal organizers" and is now actively telling Green Party supporters to vote Liberal, of all things.

 

This, according to our Liberal insider, in exchange for a possible Senate seat and a place as Environment Minister in a Dion-led government. To be clear, Ms May's curious strategy of backing Dion is creating ill-will within her own party to the point that "a lot of Green candidates are upset", according to one national news report this morning. Add to that the fact Dion himself is urging Greenies to go red and join the Liberals.

 

Sounds like the making of another Liberal scandal to me. I wonder if Miss May knows the law.

From http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/ShowDoc/cs/E-...alse#codese:481

Canada Elections Act :

 

Offering bribe

 

481. (1) Every person is guilty of an offence who, during an election period, directly or indirectly offers a bribe to influence an elector to vote or refrain from voting or to vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate.

 

Accepting bribe

(2) Every elector is guilty of an offence who, during an election period, accepts or agrees to accept a bribe that is offered in the circumstances described in subsection (1).

[dryfly]

Here's some more grist for the mill....Greens wanted to bail on this idiocy. This bimbo can't accept democracy for what it is.

 

============ Quoted material below ================

 

Now you wouldn't think of Pallister Saskatchewan as the hotbed of "progressive" voting ideas, but CPAC just happened to catch the Greens and Liberals in action.

 

The Greens and Liberals (with Carolyn Bennett present) try to form a coalition in the riding, but the NDP will have none of it. All this, just to stop those scary Conservatives. They never stop to think that people might actually like the Conservative platform and think that lefties are wrong. It never even enters their carbon riddled brains, that they just might be the ones who are off track. How May cried about democracy to get into the debates, and then just throws it aside when it's not to her liking.

[PGK]

.

[TerryH]

Even more reason to vote NDP.

Yeh right, Prime Minister Jack Layton .................arrrrrrrrggggggghhhhhh!!!! Montana, here I come. Terry