81

Would you support a Canadian Tea Party?


 

 
Filed under:

Would you support a Canadian Tea Party?

  1. The Tea Party supports freedom from government which has been proven time and time again to be the only way to prosperity.

    • I think they actually support INCREASED freedom from government, not freedom from government.

      One thing I know about prosperity is that you don't find too many stable, prosperous anarchies.

      • Freedom 'from' government interference while they go about their business. Do you really think Tea Party crowd look like anarchists? Really?

          • Holly,

            Included in your childish video is a quote from Sarah Palin wherein she simply states a readily verifiable and quite relevant fact — that one can see Russian from Alaska. Reasonable persons can only imagine how the mindless Left sees this as "crazy" (to quote the title of your silly video) .

            For proof of the veracity of Sarah's statement see one of countless photos documenting the fact:
            http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=44939251

            Expanding upon Sarah's comments in the above link, perhaps you would like to explore the facts on ANWR:
            http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/08/palin-on-anwr.h

            From there, you might care to explore a little more on USA hydrocarbon resources (not even including tremendous new Natural Gas discoveries):
            http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/07/oil-resources-i

            Or, if you are a typical Leftist, perhaps your silly video is all the "education" your ideology requires.

          • Sorry, I got distracted by your climate change deniosaur droppings. Sorry, no credibility there.

          • Holly,

            Ah, yes…
            When a profoundly ignorant Leftist is cornered, they always deflect.

            Fine, let's follow your deflection…
            According to my logs, you spent 41 seconds investigating 3 pages? That might explain why you failed to notice the directly cited peer reviewed science in my arguments against Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.

            Click here for some basic climate change science.

            Click here & debunk climate hysteria topic by topic.

            P.S.) I am, myself, an Environmental Scientist. That makes me infinitely more qualified to lead the IPCC than this joker: http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2009/11/comrades-give-u

          • Be Honest, you only really disagree with climate change because if you accepted the theory it would imply doing something about it that would create positive liberty. To you that is anathema as your politics dictates that that would inevitably lead to tyranny and coercion. Hence your mind can't deal with the dissonance that that would imply. You therefore spend your time trying to destroy that which creates the dissonance. Fun.

          • I am hesitant to respond to such an obvious example of trollish behavior, but…

            Do you really find a centrally planned economy representative of "positive liberty"?

            If so, you can start here and explore just one tiny example of the realities of "tyranny and coercion":
            http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2010/06/wind-farms-paid

            The entire Ethanol debacle is another example of the wonderful "positive liberty" created by "tyranny and coercion":
            http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/09/lessons-of-etha

          • So someone has a photo showing Russia from land in Alaska. This proves what exactly? Are you sure it's your political foes who are mindless?

          • If you had bothered to read the first link, you would know the answer to your silly question.

            But, you obviously prefer to remain ignorant, eh?

            Let me give you a big boy clue — National Security.

          • Apparently you seem to feel that your arguments are so weak that you must attack my image in order to prove your point. Did you learn this by reading one of Ann Coulter's books?

            Seriously, you wish to rebut me just by saying "National Security"!?

            You're in an uphill struggle if you ever wish to convince people, who aren't already pre-disposed to liking Palin, that she's even half competent. Good Luck!

            I think this is hilarious: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northam

            Karl Rove:
            "With all due candour, appearing on your own reality show on the Discovery Channel, I am not certain how that fits in the American calculus of 'that helps me see you in the Oval Office' … "There are high standards that the American people have for it [the presidency] and they require a certain level of gravitas, and they want to look at the candidate and say 'that candidate is doing things that gives me confidence that they are up to the most demanding job in the world'."

            With friends like these…

          • 1) Yeah, National Security says it all. Palin's entirely accurate and entirely relevant original comment was made in the context of Alaska's historically unique position as it relates to National Security. Only morons fell for the pathetic smear attempt which devolved from that original comment. If the shoe fits…

            2) Nor would I like to see Palin as President. Her best role is the one she has now.

            3) In this case, Rove is ignorant of the facts. Palin is scheduled to appear in a documentary of the unique lifestyle found in Alaska. This is NOT a reality show. I agree with Rove far more often than I disagree with him. But, Rove is representative of the old guard Socialist-Lite wing of the Republican Party. He is not representative of the TEA Party. Click here and you'll get a tiny bit of insight into that particular picture.

    • Exactly, this is why countires with no-to-little government, like Somalia, are so prosperous.

      • As always, when the well tuned ears of a leftist hear the words "less government" they hear "anarchy". Can't let dissension lead to that no sir.

    • I believe that to be true. However I think if you look at what the americans have done is rather that starting a new party they are going to give the republicans another chance to prove themselves as fiscal conservatives and follow the constitution. If that fails I think you will see a third party in the U.S. come next election. As for us we can do the same. We do not need another elected party. We have a conservative party. What we need to do is put forth an agenda on what our principles are and promote from there. I think this whole idea of a tea party is great. Our country is of the rails in many areas. We need to stop the expansion of the federal gov`t. The list could go on and on. I would enjoy hearing from anyone who shares this idea.

  2. I don't see much difference between the Tea Party and the minority government we have now except, as usual, Canada is like a decaffeinated America…including decaf Tea.

    • Agreed. Seems to me the media is attempting to denigrate the recent movement toward the centre-right in Canada by falsely labelling it as a "tea-party" movement. Or is it that Macleans has reduced itself to "cut and paste" journalism?

      Macleans certainly knows how to insult their readers: Canadians are rarely "monkey-see, monkey-do" type of people. When are they going to wake up and realize that Canadians, like the citizens of Toronto, are just tired of shadowy, partisan-interest, back-room dealings and are looking for an honest alternative. That, unfortunately, leaves out Harper, Ignatieff/Rae, and Layton.

      FYI – for the fearful or easily persuaded: Rob Ford is nothing like Sarah Palin.

      • When they no longer reside in Toronto. Something about a forest and some trees.

  3. Oh, yes, that's what we need; another party to further split the vote. What do we have now. Conservatives, Liberals, NDP, Green Party, Marijuana party and now a Tea Party. We'll wind up with decades of minority government with no progress, and decades of elections costing millions of dollars that don't resolve any issues. Less government, not more.

    • Despite its name, the Tea Party is not a political party. It's a philosophical movement that at least in theory can draw support from adherents ("members" is too strong) from members of a variety of political parties. Granted, since the core philosophies of the Tea Party movement is pretty much at loggerheads with the core philosophies of the Democrats in the States / the NDP in Canada, I wouldn't expect to see much of those specific combinations.

      The "Tea Party" isn't necessarily splitting the vote further, although it could if there were two parties / candidates on a ballot that shared their values. They're just hoping to shift votes from the left to the right, regardless of formal party affiliations.

    • There's a Marijuana Party?

    • The TEA Party is not a political party per se (and is unlikely to become one).

      In theory, the TEA Party is a grass roots uprising intent on reducing the scope and scale of government via any political party willing to uphold TEA Party values. In practice, the TEA party is effectively a reform movement within the Republican Party — because the Democrat Party was long ago taken over by radical Socialists who have no interest in embracing the smaller government TEA Party agenda.

      There are two Senate races (Alaska and Florida) where the vote has been split. But, in both cases, that was a function of the establishment Republican candidate refusing to accept the outcome of the Republican primary and arrogantly running as a third party candidate. There is one TEA Party endorsed candidate running for Governor (in my home state of Colorado). He is running — not under a TEA Party label (there is no such thing) — but under the American Constitution Party label. Yes, we too already have many, many "third" Parties. Only in the governor's race is a Democrat likely to benefit from the vote split. But, in that case, the establishment Republican candidate was arguably worse than the Dem anyway — so, no real loss. And, the TEA Party candidate just might pull it off.

      What both of our countries need is an awakening among a strong majority of voters intent upon shaking off the shackles of big Socialist government. That is the goal of the (non-Party) TEA Party.

  4. The bottom line is United States is in heavy debt and they want reduce the debt.The well off want lower taxs.E wonder who is going to pay for this.Are they going kill off the middle class.

    • No, they want to kill of big government. Why don't you read first and comment after?

      • Make that "off"

  5. It would shine a light on the radical right and help distinguish among fiscal conservatives, social conservatives and angry "Know-Nothing/Tea Party Movement".

    Before people who fall in the third category self-define themselves and get angrier, the term does not impugn their native intelligence but rather the incoherence of the movement as a whole, their general misunderstanding of the range of issues under the movement, and failure to define coherent solutions. This may be true for the other parties as well but at least we know who they are and what they are trying to do to present themselves as coherent.

    • It is hilarious to see the apologists for the left calling the right incoherent. The left in North America keeps flogging the dead horse of socialism when Europe is literally burning as an example of the end stage of socialism – populations trained to demand more from their governments than they can afford and willing to tear their countries and young to bits rather than return to fiscal sanity. But then, why expect coherent thought from people who present warmed over 19th century marxism that has a 100% failure rate and unsurpassed butcher's bill as "progressive"?

      • The countries that are the most socialist in Europe – Norway, Sweden, etc. – are doing fine. Sweden has 3% unemployment, compared to the near 10% of the USA. They are able to maintain a well-funded social welfare system because people there are more mature than in other countries, at least in the regard that they are willing to pay higher taxes to cover these services. People in other countries want health care, good roads, a well funded military, etc. but don't want to pay taxes. Either that, or they spend their time fantasizing about Mad Max worlds or oligarchies…

        • In fact, the "go to" countries for liberals praising socialism have been shifting rightward by increments for some time now. That and Norway's oil reserves are all that are keeping them afloat economically. Funny how Canadian libs don't discuss Scandinavian health care anymore since they moved to a mixed private and public system. Finally, both countries held up as examples to us are seeing increased Welfare use and crime from unassimilated Muslim populations that are stressing their "maturity". Of course, anyone depending on lib sources is deaf dumb and blind to these realities that disturb their Scandinavian socialist utopia myth.

  6. If you pause and think about it, this is what has happened in BC wrt the HST – the province will hold a referendum on whether to retain this tax or not, separate from any election. Is this good or bad? I guess it depends on where you sit on the issue.

  7. Only if the Conservatives screw things up… and they haven't exactly been perfect so far.

  8. We already have the tea party in Canada . AKA The Regressive Conservative Party .

  9. Where have you folks been? In the 1980's a right wing grass roots party called "Reform" came out of Western Canada. They were formed because their creators felt they were getting a raw deal from Trudeau and the Liberals. No populist party ever gets to power on their own. They always attach themselves to a majority party. In 1993 the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada was decimated in the election and limped along until 2000 when it was taken over by the Reform Party and became the Conservative Party of Canada. The government we have in Canada today is what the U.S.A. will have after the Tea Party takes over the Republican Party in a few years. We are always ahead of the U.S. with new ideas — good or bad.

    • Except that the Conservative Party of Canada is a more centrist party than the Tea Party. They are radical right-wingers. While members of the Conservative party may be more extreme than others, as a whole it is centrist.

  10. I enjoyed reading the various and sundry comments – it really was an overview of how the people – the populace are thinking and – they are now thinking. I wonder if the phenoman of Facebook and Twitter has made people aware they do have a voice?
    I wonder if any of the provincial or federal parties are beginning to understand it's no longer their way – but it is the peoples way? My comment is – be glad you live in Canada and other then Australia there is no other country in the world like it, politics and all. IMHO.

    • and New Zealand

  11. Try it now, I bet it'd have success. We'll settle for the Conservative party for now though.

  12. The Tea party is a corporate front group and a corporate media creation. They claim they are for smaller government, but when it gets down to specifics they are for huge outlays for war and have no stand on corporate bailouts. They also do not want regulation of the crooks on Wall Street. The only thing they want to cut is programs that help the little guy but they can't come right out and say it. This is why it is a very small group but the corporate media propaganda outlets (Owned by the same rich with their self serving lies and their self serving astro turf movements) promote it 24/7. Hate, lies, and invective: all the right wing corporate front groups have to try to divert attention from real issues and real debate. Pharmacist in the USA who reads and threw out the boob tube.

  13. I want a centralized government, elected by the people, and the social services that it provides for the good of the people. I am happy to pay taxes for this. I am not interested in living in the kind of country the Tea Party (aka Sarah Palin's Party) wants to create.

    • Eventually you won't be able to afford the socialists you elect because you will be unemployed when they 'tax the rich' like you out of existence. Social programs should be reserved for people that need them, they cannot be universal because that is not sustainable.

      • Actually, I would argue that government should never engage in any acts of "charity".

        First, when "charitable" funds are stolen at gunpoint, it's not charity.

        Second, government is — by far — the least efficient and the least effective way to deliver charity of any sort.

        The tired old "Liberal" rebuttal will be to paint me as heartless and cruel. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I simply understand the obvious fact that private charity serves the needy and government "charity" primarily serves the bureaucrats.

        The best sort of charity is transacted between individuals with no intermediaries. That is the charity I most often engage in. 100% goes to the (truly) needy.

    • Lyn,

      What you "want" has proven to fail miserably — to the terrible detriment of "the good people" — everywhere it has ever been tried.

      If we continue on our present course, both your country and mine will — in rather short order – face exactly what England, France, Greece, Spain and others are facing today.

      We can pay the piper now or pay him much more later. But, either way, we will BOTH pay that piper. We are both living an utterly unsustainable fantasy. One way or another, that fantasy WILL end. The longer we put off the inevitable, the more pain we will both endure.

  14. "It seems to me that less government control on banking and big business has gotten USA in thier current state of affairs".
    .
    Do more homework. It's over-reaching government that was the initial problem, too much say in things they know nothing about like the housing market. It's truly pathetic what misplaced faith liberal voters have in the mediocrities (mostly lawyers) they elect to run an economy. It was a Democrat policy under Carter, the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act that started the last economic stink bubble rolling, being a euphemism for forcing banks to make housing loans to people who were not remotely creditworthy. http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/09/1977-community-… This economically stupid idea was predicated on housing prices continuing to rise in perpetuity and was goosed under Clinton. A Democrat Congress in the last two years of the Bush administration repelled all Republican attempts to rein in the government created Fannie and Freddie lousy mortgage arm with point man being Democrat Barney Frank. Misinformed by the media purposely or because media types are economic illiterates, the public re-elected a stronger Democrat Congress, i.e. installed the arsonists to manage the burning building.

    As for the banks, they figured out a way to make money on the losing mortgages forced on them by the government. Guess who bailed them out of their foolish risks by using taxpayer money… the Democrats who get more financial support from Wall Street than do Republicans, the reverse of the leftist myth. Democrat fingerprints are all over the housing and mortgage fiasco from start to finish. Now the public has had two years to figure out who had the matches and who have been setting new brush fires in every sector of the economy. Those matches are about to be taken away from the Democrat children.

    • I love how you use an anti-Democrat blog to support your argument. Perhaps you should try linking to credible articles from credible sources, which would make your argument credible. Otherwise, you just appear to be just another partisan hack!!

      • Albert,

        As the author of the cited blog, I deeply resent that entirely bogus (and utterly ignorant) remark.

        I take great pride in directly citing highly credible sources.

        In my link cited by Minaka (and all the sub-links under that) you will find a greater assortment of extremely credible sources than ANY other article you will EVER read on this subject.

        Take your blinders off and educate yourself!

        • It has been my experience that partisan hacks such as yourself generally do get resentful when called on their BS. Blaming the Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac meltdown solely on the Democrats is totally disingenuous and wrong.

          From 2001 to 2007, Republicans were in control at ALL levels of government, and while acknowledging that there were problems with the system, they did nothing to correct it.

          In future when linking to an article, do so but to THE article and not through a re-direct on your partisan blog.

      • Albert,

        I take it you lean (heavily) Left.

        That would imply that you find the New York Times to be a "credible" source. The NYT is the central citation in the followong sub-link from the link provided by Minaka:
        http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2009/02/bill-clinton-an

        There are a great many other sources cited in that sub-link which any hardcore Leftist would view as "credible".

    • Minaka,

      I failed — at first — to notice the hierarchical commenting structure of this site. So, I will repeat here what I previously said outside of this sub-thread.

      Yours was an excellent and entirely correct summary of our Dem created housing mess. Very good.

      Both Canada and the USA would be far better off if more voters were as well informed as you.

      I dare say Canada could use a TEA Party of their own.

  15. Minaka,

    That was an excellent and entirely correct summary. Very good.

    Both Canada and the USA would be far better off if more voters were as well informed as you.

    I dare say Canada could use a TEA Party of their own.

  16. Oh crap, I thought it said Canadian Tire Party

  17. Yet another political party is not the answer. We need a non-political party that is not so steeped in political correctness that it becomes just another unheeded voice. We need a grass roots movement that does not have to pander to special interest groups for votes.

    • That is in fact the nature of the Tea Party activists in the USA.

  18. P.S.) Once again, directly citing the New York Times as proof that the Republicans wanted to regulate Fannie and Freddie and the Dims did not: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E

    Note that, lacking a super-majority in the Senate, Republicans were unable to overcome the utterly corrupt obstructionism from the Dims.

    As to why the utterly corrupt Dims obstructed these regulatory reforms, follow the money: http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/09/crony-capitalis

    Again, the full story — complete with dozens if not hundreds of extremely credible source citations — is found in the following link and all associated sub-links: http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/09/1977-community-

  19. Tea party leads 2 prosperity??? Think again–in the end it leads 2 anarcky!! We have governments –cause only a certain number of people can decide what's best 4 all—getting everyone involved–only leads 2 arguments & chaos in the end– as nobody can agree. so hang on 2 a Governing house–they usually know what's best–for the country. Obama listened 2 the people only (didn't think)—used up his trillions–didn't know how 2 spend it–well—now there is talk of printing another trillion–as the tea party– insists on spending!!! Well then– who finally pays off the debts??? think people think!!!!!

  20. Constitutional government is not anarchy, in fact it's the opposite of anarchy.

  21. The Tea Party of the USA are nothing more than mad white people who want lower taxes
    ( oh shucks Oboma did that already). Less government (good luck with that), blame Mexicans for America's problems (insert republicans here the real problem), cut of the lazy welfare bums (95% of all welfare in America is corporate), and to take back America (insert minorities here), Get rid of all gays (God made Gay people), And to remain as ignorant and uneducated as possible (mission accomplished)…..STAY OUT OF MY COUNTRY "CANADA"= NO TEA BAG!

    • Dim propaganda regurgitated — who can argue with the fully indoctrinated? The indoctrinated are immune to facts, logic and reason.

      This is what the TEA Party actually stands for:
      http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2010/09/give-us-liberty

      Canada would do well to embrace similar logic.

      • Indoctrinated into what I'm Canadian? I am from a country that can still pride itself for it's education system. I am informed of the facts i watch the news and I even watch Fox news 3-5 days every week. As well as BBC, CBS, many different magazines and websites. I do not need to look at your propaganda to know what the TEA party is all about. Unlike the TEA party members I can find "reality" on the map…Ha Ha get it?

        I guess the USA needs some "dabbled in witchcraft" representation…Tea Party=Traitors to the rightfully elected president.

        Here's a 100 accomplishment list of what Oboma and the Democrats have done in 18 months.
        Now read a link of proven facts SBVOR not propaganda. (EVERYONE READ THIS PLEASE)!

        http://simplifythepositive.blogspot.com/2010/03/1

        • Indoctrinated into what? Are you so indoctrinated you don't even know? SOCIALISM! MARXISM!

          Obama's so-called "accomplishments" are hated across the board by a wide majority:
          http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/b

          Yesterday was not an election, it was a restraining order — delivered directly to Obama.

          • I guess you are against the military, equal pay for women, millions of children getting health care. etc etc etc.
            What part of EVERY industry in the US receives corporate welfare do you not understand? this = socialism. Police, fire departments, schools, military, public works, libraries, etc etc etc, the funny thing is that you are actually against what makes a country great. America is socialized already. You lack of intelligence is shocking. You actually believe you live in a capitalist country? You are a fool.

          • 1) Adopting a Socialist paradigm for the delivery of publicly funded "education" was the worst mistake this country ever made. Every problem we face today can be directly or indirectly traced to that one mistake.

            2) Your assertion that "EVERY industry in the US receives corporate welfare" is a bald faced lie.

            That said…

            I hate Crony Capitalism. That is almost entirely the domain of Dims. Here is the worst example of all:
            http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/09/crony-capitalis

            Here are a whole bunch more examples:
            http://sbvor.blogspot.com/search/label/Crony%20Ca

            P.S.) Contrary to your bald faced lie about "corporate welfare", USA corporations pay the highest corporate tax in the entire developed world:
            http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2010/10/obama-is-trying

            3) If Canadian Socialist health care is so great, why do your political tyrants find it necessary to outlaw private competition?
            http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2009/06/socialist-healt

            4) Only a willfully ignorant fool or an evil bastard would consider Socialism to have ever made anything great. If the shoe fits…

    • Love it. Agree completely: stay out of our country!

  22. What does it say about me that my glance reading of the poll made me wonder why we're discussing a Canadian Tire Party.

  23. Now go away and sell your baloney to people who don't read, this is Canada and I am a free thinking, and well informed CANADIAN!

    Tea Party crap don't fly here.

    • "I am a free thinking, and well informed CANADIAN!"

      Well, for your sort, I suppose getting one out of three correct ain't bad, eh?

      • "My sort" oh someone who is not a traitor to my leader and country. Someone like you who undermines a President who is doing what he ran for office on. Someone you blame for Americas problems when it was greedy bankers and wall streets mistakes that he is fixing. Someone who wants smaller government so the rich can take advantage off the working man again? The thing is you will accept and take all the benefits of the socialism that is the distinction of modern society but you undermine it while your greedy paw is out. Keep writing please I enjoy making you look like the fool that you are…..Shouldn't you be watching FOX NEWS so they can tell you how to think. BOOOoo be scared the bad black-man is coming for you gun and bible.

        • 1) “Someone like you who undermines a President who is doing what he ran for office on.”

          A) It's called holding a political tyrant accountable. But, I understand why tyrannical sorts find that objectionable.

          Obama ran as almost the polar opposite of what he turned out to be. Of course, those of us who bothered to research his past knew this would be the case:
          http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-ayers.htm
          http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/10/is-obama-social

          B) If your beloveds in the so-called “profession” of so-called “journalism” were not utterly corrupt, we would not have been required to do our own research. The effect of the utterly corrupt Lame Stream Media is very well documented through the interviews conducted in this video clip:
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm1KOBMg1Y8

          2) “it was greedy bankers and wall streets mistakes that he [Obama] is fixing”

          Good little doggie — Master Pavlov would be very proud.

          The following is your best entry point into the facts of the matter:
          http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2009/02/bill-clinton-an

          The following tells the much larger story:
          http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2008/09/1977-community-

          3) Really? You're playing the racism card?

          Haven't you figured out that NOBODY other than your fellow Cultural Marxists is buying that line of crap?

          • SBVOR hop in your gas guzzling truck and drive it on the socialist built roads, when you get to a river cross it on that socialist built bridge, send your children to the socialist built and funded school, and while you sleep rest easy cause the socialist military, FBI, CIA, DEA, Coast Guard, Police, and Fire Departments are protecting you.

            After driving you get to your socialist protected industry job, and there you can turn on the lights from the socialist built power plant, who's service is delivered to you on socialist built power lines……Do I need to go on or are you beginning to understand that you live in a socialist country without who's industry could not compete with the rest of the world if it did not have the socialist protectionist ideals (tariffs, subsidies, pork barrel corporate welfare) that are used by your (USA) and all countries to compete with each other.

            Oh great another Olympic gold medal for the USA brought about by that socialist built gym, track, swimming pool. And you gotta love those socially aware coaches who volunteer their time for the greater good for free.

            This is why we human beings can not understand the sub humans like "you all", you just don't accept and live in the real world.

            I will ask you a very simple question "do you just choose to ignore or pretend you do not live in a socialist country"? (reply here)

            I understand the American delusion that the majority of your country lives in; but at some point will the American people every grow up and stop pretending that they are not socialists with a subsidized capitalist (lol) economy.?

            Get Oboma out of power quick he is turning the USA into the country "you all" brag about but are not.

          • Government should deliver those (very few) goods and services which only government can deliver. The private sector should do the rest.

            The rationale for government to have a monopoly on roads vanished with the advent of the toll tag.

            The worst government monopoly of all is the monopoly on the delivery of publicly funded "education".

            The Canadian government monopoly on health care (imposed through force of law) is, in the case of Canada, a close second in atrociously inappropriate and entirely counter-productive government monopolies:
            http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2009/06/socialist-healt

          • Do you have any of your own opinions or just links to your controllers? You are a pawn, and have not replied in any meaningful way to any off the truths or questions I have put before you.

            Government Health Care is what Canadians want, if some services can be provided safely and cheaply by the private sector great. But just try to mess with our delivery system and you will see the Canadian people get upset. Unlike Tea-Baggers and Republicans we want to take care of our less fortunate, older citizens, and ourselves. Not get ripped off by middle-man insurance companies like you in the USA

            The most expensive health care system in the world but left 50 million people without care. 15 million children, and the USA considers itself for the most part a Christian country….sure real Christians alright….Not reading the same Bible I have read. .

            Education paid for by our tax dollars is exactly what we want in Canada it is considered a right, the thing is we actually have children who can read when they graduate. The stuff the kids are learning now is superior to what i was taught and I am quite happy (despite some large class room sizes) with the education my children are getting. There are also many private schools and French Immersion programs as well. It is as much my responsibility as the governments to insure my children work hard and do well in school.

            I am done this discussion with you as it has proven pointless, you do not respond to simple questions and you only seem to have links to do your talking I doubt you are a American or a Tea-Bagger.

            You know absolutely nothing about Canada or its people so don't try to speak for them. And if you are a Canadian posing as a Tea-Bagger move to the USA, I am sure there is a women who you can throw to the ground and stomp on….Cause that's how you Tea-Baggers roll.

            Well 65.91% of people who voted on this site say NO to Tea-Baggers. What do you think off that SBVOR. Do you have a link for that too?

    • The fact that you can even operate a PC amazes me, you pal are a fool.

  24. The tea party is primarily a bunch of rich religious wing nuts that want to raise the debt even higher to satisfy their own greed with no thought to the next generation or even much thought to this generation that are not one of them.

  25. It is difficult to totally articulate the disillusionment and disenchantment that legitimate small-c fiscal, social, and judicial conservatives who elected him feel about our disingenuous leader. We were “had” by a ruthless and callous man whose ambition led him to sell his “declared” conservative principles for the highest office in the land.

    Harper, as he has plunged to the left, has injured the country fiscally, socially and judicially, and he has guaranteed that our children's standard of living will be subordinate to our current standard.

    Harper's pathetic, leftist brand of collectivist mush, including his propensity to interfere in the free market place, his massive overspending, and his expansion of government, is the rationale for us legitimate small-c fiscal, social, and judicial conservatives apprehending that we are not represented in the Conservative Party or in the House of Commons.

    • After many years of believing that Harper was the best option for Canada I have to agree with you machiavelli. The time has come for a change. To bad the Liberals have not had a person capable of pulling off a election win. Can some one give me a handful of examples of Harper's Govt. doing anything for Canadians and our future?

      When are the Liberals going to pull out their trump card Trudeau Jr.

  26. Canada needs something like the Tea Party movement. It is long past time that the role of government be strictly limited to the defense of individual rights. It is long past time that Canadians recognize that collectivized "rights" simply mean that the government crushes the rights of some to give unearned benefits to others.

  27. It was government control that caused the "situation". Banks were pressured into offering loans to people who didn't qualify.

    "The policy in question is the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), which compels banks to make loans to low-income borrowers and in what the supporters of the Act call "communities of color" that they might not otherwise make based on purely economic criteria. "

  28. Government has always been a necessary evil.

    How can less evil be bad?

Sign in to comment.