Why the Conservatives have been in Power since 2006: Liberal Corruption

72 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Why the Conservatives have been in Power since 2006: Liberal Corruption

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""

NorthReport

Poor Liberals. They always mix things up and are confused. Most if not all Canadians know Liberals got the boot in 2006 because of their massive corruption.

How many Liberals went to jail over the Liberal Sponsorship Scandal?

Liberal Sponsorship Scandal

The sponsorship scandal, "AdScam" or Sponsorgate, is a scandal that came as a result of a Canadian federal government "sponsorship program" in the province of Quebec and involving the Liberal Party of Canada, which was in power from 1993 to 2006. The program was originally established as an effort to raise awareness of the Government of Canada's contributions to Quebec industries and other activities in order to counter the actions of theParti Québécois government of the province that worked to promote Quebec independence.

The program ran from 1996 until 2004, when broad corruption was discovered in its operations and the program was discontinued. Illicit and even illegal activities within the administration of the program were revealed, involving misuse and misdirection of public funds intended for government advertising in Quebec. Such misdirections included sponsorship money awarded to ad firms in return for little or no work, which firms maintained Liberal organizers or fundraisers on their payrolls or donated back part of the money to the Liberal Party. The resulting investigations and scandal affected the Liberal Party of Canada and the then-government of Prime Minister Paul Martin. It was an ongoing affair for years, but rose to national prominence in early 2004 after the program was examined by Sheila Fraser, the federal auditor general. Her revelations led to the Martin government establishing theGomery Commission to conduct a public inquiry and file a report on the matter. The official title of this inquiry was the Commission of Inquiry into the Sponsorship Program and Advertising Activities. In the end the Commission concluded that $2 million was awarded in contracts without a proper bidding process, $250,000 was added to one contract price for no additional work, and $1.5 million was awarded for work that was never done, of which $1 million had to be repaid. The overall operating cost of the Commission was $14 million.[1]

In the national spotlight, the scandal became a significant factor in the lead-up to the 2006 federal election when, after more than twelve years in power, the Liberals were defeated by the Conservatives, who formed a minority government that was sworn in February 2006.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsorship_scandal

David Young

Don't forget that is was the votes of Liberal M.P.'s like Justin (It-For-Me) Trudeau that kept the Conservatives in power between 2008 and 2011 as well.

Brachina

 Also don't forget the massive cuts to the social safety net, which lead to privatization at fire sale prices, and then instead restoring funding, they cut taxes for the rich. This was a form of legal corruption.. This made Stephen's Harper behavior seem normal, even restrained by comparesion.

KenS

I just can't get enough of Babble threads kicked off with a position stated as fact.

NorthReport
Unionist

NorthReport wrote:

How many Liberals went to jail over the Liberal Sponsorship Scandal?

I give up.

  1. How many went to jail?
  2. How many were charged?
  3. Any names?
  4. Or, how about names of those who should have been charged and weren't?
  5. Why weren't they?
  6. Will they be charged after the NDP comes to power?

This is a great thread.

NorthReport

Unionist,

Stop trying to sweep Liberal corruption under the rug

Unionist

NorthReport wrote:

Unionist,

Stop trying to sweep Liberal corruption under the rug

Au contraire, I'm looking under the rug - are you? Who should be charged? What with?

Here in Québec, we don't fuck around. The mayor of Montréal was arrested at home, taken away in handcuffs. Other mayors too. Federal candidates are facing charges. The ruling Liberals are scared shitless because the Charbonneau Commission has given them advance warning that the report will find fault.

Meantime, you Canadians are big talkers. Michael Sona, Joe Fontana - that's it - anyone else??

I want names and suggested charges - credible ones - of Liberals.

If you can't come up with any, then that would imply that one of us doesn't really care all that much about Liberal corruption, except as an excuse for why the Conservatives achieved and retained power.

Guess who.

 

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

Liberal Sponsorship Scandal

In the end the Commission concluded that $2 million was awarded in contracts without a proper bidding process, $250,000 was added to one contract price for no additional work, and $1.5 million was awarded for work that was never done, of which $1 million had to be repaid. The overall operating cost of the Commission was $14 million.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsorship_scandal

The numbers almost sound quaint in retrospect, but the principle is the thing right, not how much or who else did what, like MP mailings and satellite offices.

Jacob Two-Two

Yes, the principle is the thing. With the mailouts and satellite offices, the NDP kept to their principles, and the Libs and Cons showed their total lack of principles by trying to trump up nonsense smear campaigns against them.

But y'know, if those sponsorship scandal numbers seem small to you, there's always the billions of dollars the Liberals stole from the EI fund. That was some criminal behaviour on a grand scale. All those people should be in prison, but you want to put them back in government. I guess some people really can't be taught, no matter how obvious you make things for them. here's to another four years of theft, corruption and betrayal of the public trust!

Unionist

If anyone has names of Liberals (or anyone) who should be charged with criminal behaviour, I'd like to hear them.

And I don't mean the kind of baseless innuendo that Judy Wasylycia-Leis was spewing in December 2005, for which Mr. Harper must have thanked her profusely.

Corruption. Let's have it. Or shut this pathetic thread, and get back to issues that actually matter to people. Like Conservative and Liberal slashing of social services and genuflecting to the wealthy. That's not "corruption". That's what they do.

The accusations of Liberal "corruption" were a gift sent from heaven (and the NDP) to Harper.

Debater

Excellent point, Unionist.  We have the NDP to thank as well for Stephen Harper being in power since 2006.

In December 2005, Judy Wasylycia-Leis allowed herself to be used as a tool by the RCMP and Zacardelli to smear Ralph Goodale & the Liberals with a fake scandal during the election and tilt it to Stephen Harper.

Goodale was later cleared and journalists uncovered possible evidence that Zacardelli may have tried to throw the election to Harper.  Harper paid Zacardelli a visit not long after the election.  Liberals called for an investigation, but the NDP backed the Conservatives in shutting it down.  Some of this is covered in Lawrence Martin's book on Stephen Harper.

Winnipeg may have dodged a bullet when Judy Wasylycia-Leis went down to defeat last fall.  Progressives have her to thank for the rise of Stephen Harper.

mark_alfred

I read Harperland and I don't recall what you're referencing, Debater.  Admittedly, I wasn't taking notes while reading it.  But still, generally if there's a reference to the NDP in some publication, I do take notice.

Jacob Two-Two

Stephen Harper only got a minority in 2006. That doesn't give you the government. The reason he took government is that the Liberal party decided that it would be better to let Harper rule than work with the opposition parties and give them legitimacy. They let Harper take power and voted with his agenda repeatedly.

Obviously a shill like you has to try to spin that somehow, but no matter how many sad excuses you dream up for why voters didn't want to vote Liberal in that election, the real truth can't be obscured. Harper didn't win government. The Liberals gave it to them. Scumbags, bloody scumbags.

Debater

Do you agree with Unionist that Judy Wasylycia-Leis helped cement Harper's victory in 2006 by making a strong effort at spreading Zacardelli's false smears against Ralph Goodale?

And do you have concerns about the way Judy Wasylycia-Leis allowed herself to be used by the RCMP in such a manner?  Or the fact that the NDP seemed perfectly fine with it even after journalists raised concerns about the situation in recent years?

Debater

mark_alfred wrote:

I read Harperland and I don't recall what you're referencing, Debater.  Admittedly, I wasn't taking notes while reading it.  But still, generally if there's a reference to the NDP in some publication, I do take notice.

It's discussed on page 18 and pages 30-31.  I just looked.  But I think you're correct that 'Harperland' doesn't go into the RCMP/Zacardelli use of Judy Wasylycia-Leis in the 2005-2006 election in as much detail as I thought.  I think there's a more detailed examination of it elsewhere.  I'll check later.  Perhaps it's in 'Power Trap' by Paul Adams that I am thinking of.

That book was written by Adams several years ago predicting that if the Liberals & NDP keep fighting each other, Harper & the Conservatives will probably keep winning elections.  Adams was certainly right about that.  Here it is several years later and look at us on this board.  As I've said many times, we spend more time fighting between Liberals & NDPers rather than going after the Conservatives.

mark_alfred

Debater wrote:

That book was written by Adams several years ago predicting that if the Liberals & NDP keep fighting each other, Harper & the Conservatives will probably keep winning elections.  Adams was certainly right about that.  Here it is several years later and look at us on this board.  As I've said many times, we spend more time fighting between Liberals & NDPers rather than going after the Conservatives.

Yeah.  Same pool of voters.  Though I suspect that if your party had chosen a decent leader like Rae a while ago rather than Iggy or the current fool that you've got, that there would be less acrimony.

NorthReport

Lots of revisionist history floating around.

Actually it was Chretien who set Martin up with the Sponsorship Scandal because Paul Martin, the greedy power hungry person that he was could not wait for Chretien to retire on his own. If he just had a little patience things would have turned out differently. Too bad for that Liberal stupidity when Martin decided to force a Liberal putsch. Oh well, them's the breaks as they say in show buz. And the current problem for the Liberals a lot of those Matinites unfortunately are still around. You can call the Liberals being out of power for such an extended period of time as Chretien's sweet revenge. 

Debater

mark_alfred wrote:

Debater wrote:

That book was written by Adams several years ago predicting that if the Liberals & NDP keep fighting each other, Harper & the Conservatives will probably keep winning elections.  Adams was certainly right about that.  Here it is several years later and look at us on this board.  As I've said many times, we spend more time fighting between Liberals & NDPers rather than going after the Conservatives.

Yeah.  Same pool of voters.  Though I suspect that if your party had chosen a decent leader like Rae a while ago rather than Iggy or the current fool that you've got, that there would be less acrimony.

Do you think that this type of dialogue (eg. name-calling towards the Liberal leader) helps establish a constructive relationship with Liberal supporters?

Apart from the fact that Justin Trudeau is no fool (he is especially very smart when it comes to retail politics, understanding voters & emotional intelligence), it just makes Liberal supporters feel hostile towards the NDP and want to respond with similiar taunts (eg. Angry Tom!).

I do agree with you that Rae would have been a better leader than Ignatieff, but who knows whether he could have restored Liberal fortunes, particularly in Ontario with all the baggage as NDP Premier.  And many NDP supporters here consider Rae a traitor for becoming a Liberal, so would there really have been a more constructive dialogue if Rae had been permanent Liberal leader?

Btw, even when Stéphane Dion was Liberal leader, there was very little positive said here about the Liberals or about Dion.  Even though Jack Layton had once praised Dion publicly as an honorable man (and said he therefore wouldn't become Liberal leader) he tried to join in with Harper in 2008 in attacking Dion's progressive idea of a carbon tax when it came to environmental policy.

Jacob Two-Two

Debater wrote:

But I think you're correct that 'Harperland' doesn't go into the RCMP/Zacardelli use of Judy Wasylycia-Leis in the 2005-2006 election in as much detail as I thought.  I think there's a more detailed examination of it elsewhere.  

You mean outside of your diseased mind? I doubt it.

Quote:

  As I've said many times, we spend more time fighting between Liberals & NDPers rather than going after the Conservatives.

You've never said this. What you say all the time is that NDP supporters go after Liberals constantly. This is the first time you've included yourself. Did you get a new crib sheet from Liberal HQ? "Building a sense of comraderie can lower defenses and increase recepitibility to your bullshit." Thanks, Justin! He always knows what to say!!

As I told you before, we're stuck slagging the Libs all the time because people like you are here shilling for them all the time. Obviously if you flood the board with pro-Liberal lies, it's going to prompt a lot of arguments about the Liberal party. Stop doing that and it will stop happening.

bekayne

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Stephen Harper only got a minority in 2006. That doesn't give you the government. The reason he took government is that the Liberal party decided that it would be better to let Harper rule than work with the opposition parties and give them legitimacy. They let Harper take power and voted with his agenda repeatedly.

So the Liberals should have clung to power by entering a coalition with the BQ?

mark_alfred

Sorry Debater.  No offence intended.  Just expressing ideas and banter, rather than attempting a "constructive relationship" (you'll have to at least buy me a coffee first, followed by a nice dinner with wine, before I consider the big R).  In the same way I found it hard to take some of Rob Ford's statements seriously, I find Trudeau's occasionally bizarre statements also hard to take seriously.  To JT's credit, his star quality has helped restore the financial status of your party, which is an accomplishment.  I still think that with Rae, or Murray or Garneau, that there would be less of the acrimony you speak of. 

Aristotleded24

bekayne wrote:
Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Stephen Harper only got a minority in 2006. That doesn't give you the government. The reason he took government is that the Liberal party decided that it would be better to let Harper rule than work with the opposition parties and give them legitimacy. They let Harper take power and voted with his agenda repeatedly.

So the Liberals should have clung to power by entering a coalition with the BQ?

I think Ujall Dosanjh [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4e5laXN9zE]got it right when he said that the Liberals needed to block the Liberals[/url] and forced the hands of the NDP and the Bloc. It's the approach the NDP used with great success.

Brachina

 The BQ were never members of the coalition, they merely backed the idea.

Unionist

Debater wrote:

But I think you're correct that 'Harperland' doesn't go into the RCMP/Zacardelli use of Judy Wasylycia-Leis in the 2005-2006 election in as much detail as I thought.  I think there's a more detailed examination of it elsewhere.  

 

I was just going by memory. It was clearly the turning point of the election campaign, based on an unfounded and obviously planted smear against Goodale. And [url=http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2008/04/01/rcmp_likely_swayed_federal... was pleased to serve as the shill.

 

Northern PoV

sorry - deleted the double post

Northern PoV

Those trivial scandals were effective distractions played up by the corporate owned media and their delighted allies among the CONs and NDP.

The  CONs are kept in power by the power hungry egos of the other parties: NDP, LIBs and yes Greens.  (Both Nathan Cullen and Joyce Murray made good offers that we were stupid to reject ... for those few who even heard about them.)

Saint Jack pulled the plug on his rival in 2006 rather than leverage the situation to get national day care, Kelowna accord etc.

1963-1968 and 1972-1974: the best modern governments in Canada.  We could have had another step forward 2004-20?? but Jack fell right into Harper's trap.

The somnolent (English) CDN electorate, lulled by media fairy tales will never* elect an NDP gov't.  The 2011 orange wave in Quebec spooked just enough "swing" voters to get us our worst nightmare.  With a little dash of Islamaphobia, Harper is headed to another win, imho.  I hope for a Liberal majority or (better) a Lib Minority with the Greens holding the balance of power.  The NDP has proven it is not to be trusted again.

*never=foresee-able future - maybe if we fall to the Greek level, a true socialist alternative will emerge but the NDP looks nothing like Syriza

 

Pondering

Northern PoV wrote:
We could have had another step forward 2004-20?? but Jack fell right into Harper's trap.

Layton wasn't trapped. His plan succeeded.

http://thewalrus.ca/2006-05-politics/

Northern PoV wrote:

*never=foresee-able future - maybe if we fall to the Greek level, a true socialist alternative will emerge but the NDP looks nothing like Syriza

Maybe the NDP can be taken over like the tea party took over the Republican party.

I don't believe we have to fall to the Greek level.

From outside, Greece looks like a giant negative: but what lies beneath the rise of the radical left is the emergence of positive new values – among a layer of young people much wider than Syriza’s natural support base. These are the classic values of the networked generation: self-reliance, creativity, the willingness to treat life as a social experiment, a global outlook.

When Golden Dawn emerged as a frightening, violent neo-Nazi force, with – at one point – 14% support, what struck the networked youth was how many of the political elite pandered to it. People who had read its history could see a replay of late Weimar flickering before their eyes: delusional Nazis feted by big businessmen craving for order.

I’ve reported the Greek crisis since it began, and what changed in 2015 was this: Syriza had already won the solid support of about 25% of voters on the issues of Europe and economics. But now a further portion of the Greek electorate, above all the young, are signalling they’ve had enough of corruption and elites.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/25/greece-shows-what-c...

 

NorthReport

More Liberal revisionist history.

Liberals need to take a long hard look in the mirror because Liberals had 11 years of majority government to bring those policies forward.

Why didn't they? Frown

 

Northern PoV wrote:

Those trivial scandals were effective distractions played up by the corporate owned media and their delighted allies among the CONs and NDP.

The  CONs are kept in power by the power hungry egos of the other parties: NDP, LIBs and yes Greens.  (Both Nathan Cullen and Joyce Murray made good offers that we were stupid to reject ... for those few who even heard about them.)

Saint Jack pulled the plug on his rival in 2006 rather than leverage the situation to get national day care, Kelowna accord etc.

1963-1968 and 1972-1974: the best modern governments in Canada.  We could have had another step forward 2004-20?? but Jack fell right into Harper's trap.

The somnolent (English) CDN electorate, lulled by media fairy tales will never* elect an NDP gov't.  The 2011 orange wave in Quebec spooked just enough "swing" voters to get us our worst nightmare.  With a little dash of Islamaphobia, Harper is headed to another win, imho.  I hope for a Liberal majority or (better) a Lib Minority with the Greens holding the balance of power.  The NDP has proven it is not to be trusted again.

*never=foresee-able future - maybe if we fall to the Greek level, a true socialist alternative will emerge but the NDP looks nothing like Syriza

 

Debater

Unionist wrote:

Debater wrote:

But I think you're correct that 'Harperland' doesn't go into the RCMP/Zacardelli use of Judy Wasylycia-Leis in the 2005-2006 election in as much detail as I thought.  I think there's a more detailed examination of it elsewhere.  

 

I was just going by memory. It was clearly the turning point of the election campaign, based on an unfounded and obviously planted smear against Goodale. And [url=http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2008/04/01/rcmp_likely_swayed_federal... was pleased to serve as the shill.

 

Yes, the link you provided backs up what you and I have both been saying about the impact of what the RCMP and Wasylycia-Leis did during the 2005-2006 election and how it helped bring Harper to power.

But we appear to be in a very small minority of posters on this board who can see that.

Debater

Brachina wrote:

 The BQ were never members of the coalition, they merely backed the idea.

This is true.

But Dion & Layton made an error in having Duceppe appear with them at the signing ceremony.  It allowed Harper to portray it as a separatist coalition.

NorthReport

You can always makes excuses: The reality is the Liberals blew the one chance to bring Harper down by blowing the coalition apart. 

Debater

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Debater wrote:

But I think you're correct that 'Harperland' doesn't go into the RCMP/Zacardelli use of Judy Wasylycia-Leis in the 2005-2006 election in as much detail as I thought.  I think there's a more detailed examination of it elsewhere.  

You mean outside of your diseased mind? I doubt it.

Quote:

  As I've said many times, we spend more time fighting between Liberals & NDPers rather than going after the Conservatives.

You've never said this. What you say all the time is that NDP supporters go after Liberals constantly. This is the first time you've included yourself. Did you get a new crib sheet from Liberal HQ? "Building a sense of comraderie can lower defenses and increase recepitibility to your bullshit." Thanks, Justin! He always knows what to say!!

As I told you before, we're stuck slagging the Libs all the time because people like you are here shilling for them all the time. Obviously if you flood the board with pro-Liberal lies, it's going to prompt a lot of arguments about the Liberal party. Stop doing that and it will stop happening.

1.  Jacob, please apologize for saying I have a 'diseased mind'.  That's a personal attack.  I'd like to give you an opportunity to retract that.

And the link posted by Unionist shows just what I was talking about - it's been well-documented that the RCMP smear against Ralph Goodale, spread by Wasylycia-Leis, had an impact in the 2005-2006 Election.  Read the articles on it.  I didn't imagine it in my 'diseased mind' like you said.

2.  It happens to be the case that most of the threads here are NDPers attacking the Liberals.  Just look at the thread titles on the first couple of pages.  Scroll down the list.  Why are so many of them about Justin Trudeau and how Liberals are corrupt/terrible/right-wing etc. and so few going after the Conservatives or Stephen Harper?  And what you call Liberal trolling and Liberal lies are often statements of fact which are backed up with links to by-election results, polls or quotes by political commentators.  And all the while you excuse your own behaviour and the way you engage in personal attacks (like you just did above!).

Do you agree that NDP supporters sometimes contribute to the negative atmosphere?

Keep in mind the title of the Paul Adams book - Power Trap - and the warning he gave Liberals & NDPers:

How Fear And Loathing Between New Democrats And Liberals Keep Stephen Harper in Power And What Can Be Done About It

NorthReport

These election results tonite in Greece will put the fear of God into the right-wing Liberals and Conservatives in Canada and probably be a shot in the arm to the NDP. The Greek message is clear to NDP supporters: do not under any circumstances ever give up. And if these right-wing Liberals try to discourage you or try to stop your enthusiasm, crush 'em like a bug.

 

Aristotleded24

NorthReport wrote:
These election results tonite in Greece will put the fear of God into the right-wing Liberals and Conservatives in Canada and probably be a shot in the arm to the NDP. The Greek message is clear to NDP supporters: do not under any circumstances ever give up. And if these right-wing Liberals try to discourage you or try to stop your enthusiasm, crush 'em like a bug.

Actually, the NDP's Greek counterparts experienced a humiliating defeat, after tumbling to third place in the 2012 elections.

NorthReport

Anyone can write anything, it is does not mean it is accurate or has any basis in fact.

And if it is connected with mainstream press reporting you can rest assured it is full of lies and deceit.

Debater wrote:

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Debater wrote:

But I think you're correct that 'Harperland' doesn't go into the RCMP/Zacardelli use of Judy Wasylycia-Leis in the 2005-2006 election in as much detail as I thought.  I think there's a more detailed examination of it elsewhere.  

You mean outside of your diseased mind? I doubt it.

Quote:

  As I've said many times, we spend more time fighting between Liberals & NDPers rather than going after the Conservatives.

You've never said this. What you say all the time is that NDP supporters go after Liberals constantly. This is the first time you've included yourself. Did you get a new crib sheet from Liberal HQ? "Building a sense of comraderie can lower defenses and increase recepitibility to your bullshit." Thanks, Justin! He always knows what to say!!

As I told you before, we're stuck slagging the Libs all the time because people like you are here shilling for them all the time. Obviously if you flood the board with pro-Liberal lies, it's going to prompt a lot of arguments about the Liberal party. Stop doing that and it will stop happening.

1.  Jacob, please apologize for saying I have a 'diseased mind'.  That's a personal attack.  I'd like to give you an opportunity to retract that.

And the link posted by Unionist shows just what I was talking about - it's been well-documented that the RCMP smear against Ralph Goodale, spread by Wasylycia-Leis, had an impact in the 2005-2006 Election.  Read the articles on it.  I didn't imagine it in my 'diseased mind' like you said.

2.  It happens to be the case that most of the threads here are NDPers attacking the Liberals.  Just look at the thread titles on the first couple of pages.  Scroll down the list.  Why are so many of them about Justin Trudeau and how Liberals are corrupt/terrible/right-wing etc. and so few going after the Conservatives or Stephen Harper?  And what you call Liberal trolling and Liberal lies are often statements of fact which are backed up with links to by-election results, polls or quotes by political commentators.  And all the while you excuse your own behaviour and the way you engage in personal attacks (like you just did above!).

Do you agree that NDP supporters sometimes contribute to the negative atmosphere?

Keep in mind the title of the Paul Adams book - Power Trap - and the warning he gave Liberals & NDPers:

How Fear And Loathing Between New Democrats And Liberals Keep Stephen Harper in Power And What Can Be Done About It

NorthReport

Anyone can write anything, it is does not mean it is accurate or has any basis in fact.

And if it is, in any way connected with mainstream press reporting, you can rest assured it is full of lies and deceit.

Debater wrote:

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Debater wrote:

But I think you're correct that 'Harperland' doesn't go into the RCMP/Zacardelli use of Judy Wasylycia-Leis in the 2005-2006 election in as much detail as I thought.  I think there's a more detailed examination of it elsewhere.  

You mean outside of your diseased mind? I doubt it.

Quote:

  As I've said many times, we spend more time fighting between Liberals & NDPers rather than going after the Conservatives.

You've never said this. What you say all the time is that NDP supporters go after Liberals constantly. This is the first time you've included yourself. Did you get a new crib sheet from Liberal HQ? "Building a sense of comraderie can lower defenses and increase recepitibility to your bullshit." Thanks, Justin! He always knows what to say!!

As I told you before, we're stuck slagging the Libs all the time because people like you are here shilling for them all the time. Obviously if you flood the board with pro-Liberal lies, it's going to prompt a lot of arguments about the Liberal party. Stop doing that and it will stop happening.

1.  Jacob, please apologize for saying I have a 'diseased mind'.  That's a personal attack.  I'd like to give you an opportunity to retract that.

And the link posted by Unionist shows just what I was talking about - it's been well-documented that the RCMP smear against Ralph Goodale, spread by Wasylycia-Leis, had an impact in the 2005-2006 Election.  Read the articles on it.  I didn't imagine it in my 'diseased mind' like you said.

2.  It happens to be the case that most of the threads here are NDPers attacking the Liberals.  Just look at the thread titles on the first couple of pages.  Scroll down the list.  Why are so many of them about Justin Trudeau and how Liberals are corrupt/terrible/right-wing etc. and so few going after the Conservatives or Stephen Harper?  And what you call Liberal trolling and Liberal lies are often statements of fact which are backed up with links to by-election results, polls or quotes by political commentators.  And all the while you excuse your own behaviour and the way you engage in personal attacks (like you just did above!).

Do you agree that NDP supporters sometimes contribute to the negative atmosphere?

Keep in mind the title of the Paul Adams book - Power Trap - and the warning he gave Liberals & NDPers:

How Fear And Loathing Between New Democrats And Liberals Keep Stephen Harper in Power And What Can Be Done About It

NorthReport

So has Wynne testified yet?

NorthReport

Not taxing the rich is also corruption.

Why Stupid Politics Is the Cause of Our Economic Problems

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-e-stiglitz/stupid-politics-economy_...

ajaykumar

FYI satellite offices =CORRUPTION

NorthReport

Because the right-wing Conservatives and the threatened with extinction right-wing Liberals gang up on the Official Opposition it is now called corruption. I'm sure you do better than this, as this bird won't fly.

 

ajaykumar wrote:

FYI satellite offices =CORRUPTION

thorin_bane

Unionist wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

Unionist,

Stop trying to sweep Liberal corruption under the rug

Au contraire, I'm looking under the rug - are you? Who should be charged? What with?

Here in Québec, we don't fuck around. The mayor of Montréal was arrested at home, taken away in handcuffs. Other mayors too. Federal candidates are facing charges. The ruling Liberals are scared shitless because the Charbonneau Commission has given them advance warning that the report will find fault.

Meantime, you Canadians are big talkers. Michael Sona, Joe Fontana - that's it - anyone else??

I want names and suggested charges - credible ones - of Liberals.

If you can't come up with any, then that would imply that one of us doesn't really care all that much about Liberal corruption, except as an excuse for why the Conservatives achieved and retained power.

Guess who.

 


Edit :Nope no point taking a personal shot, just you being you and adding nothing to the conversation other than your cynasicm of everything NDP.

Unionist

thorin_bane wrote:

Edit :Nope no point taking a personal shot, just you being you and adding nothing to the conversation other than your cynasicm of everything NDP.

I thought I'd comment on the asinine topic of this stupid thread about "Liberal corruption", a Stephen Harper talking point - only those brainless cheerleaders of the NDP, who have no expectations of social change and progressive movement coming from real people, could spout such idiocy.

"Liberals are corrupt!" What utter imbecility. Liberals are the representatives of the wealthy ruling classes. They are not "corrupt". To accuse them of criminal behaviour without being able to name a single crime committed by a single one? It's a sure sign of political impotence and surrender.

Fortunately, there are many people of principle militating still in the ranks of the NDP. They are not the ones so brain-dead as to be sucked into the "Liberal corruption" trap of Harper. They actually have links with real people, and real movements. We have some of those here in Québec, and some are even MPs. There is hope. Not all of them have submitted to bullying and intimidation. Not all of them have yet gone the way of Libby Davies. Some still find ways to speak truth to power. I believe Libby will one day return to her pre-2010 courage and principle. She has many examples to follow. She is not alone.

 

Jacob Two-Two

You don't think draining the EI fund was a crime? That was over a billion dollars in pulic funds that they had no right to. It's supposed to be an "insurance plan". That means all money it takes in is saved to pay out again. The Liberals stole that money. They are thieves. So are the Cons, but everyone agrees on that. There's still a few here who want to cover up the Liberals' criminal behaviour.

Unionist

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

You don't think draining the EI fund was a crime?

Yes, I do. It was a dirty anti-worker deed, typical of that government. No, it was not "corruption", and it was not a "crime" under the Criminal Code. I'm wondering what the NDP intends to do to ensure that such dirty behaviour cannot be repeated? Perhaps you can refer me to their policy in this regard.

Quote:
There's still a few here who want to cover up the Liberals' criminal behaviour.

Maybe. But there are also a few here who are apparently still harping on the stupidity of the "Liberals are corrupt" theme - the stupidity that helped Harper win the 2006 election, in fact, which was probably the turning point of the campaign, as we discussed here at that time. You can put the names of Judy Wasylycia-Leis and Paul Summerville (remember that scumbag?) in the annals of infamy for being the shills of Harper and Zaccardelli at that time.

At least we can muster enough of a sense of shame to understand that Harper and Trudeau and their ilk will be defeated on their hostility to the interests of Canadian working people - not on sheep-like choruses worthy of the National Citizens' Coalition about "corruption". It's frankly amazing that 8 years later, there are still well-intentioned adults that haven't wrapped their brain around that simple truth yet.

 

jjuares

I believe we have gone too far with all these multiple threads about the same thing-federal politics. And the provocative titles and links don't really help also.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:

I give up.

  1. How many went to jail?
  2. How many were charged?
  3. Any names?
  4. Or, how about names of those who should have been charged and weren't?
  5. Why weren't they?
  6. Will they be charged after the NDP comes to power?

Number 4 is a bit of a value judgement, and numbers 5 and 6 can only be answered with conjecture, but the first three seem like reasonable and objective questions in the context of this thread.

In the interest of disclosure, I'm only asking because I'm a bit surprised at how the primary focus of babble, after, of course, golf-clapping for the government of Russia, seems to be going after Gord-forsaken Liberals (or their "paid shills") the way crows go after owls.   How many babblers secretly wish Brigette DePape's sign had instead said "STOP JUSTIN"?

Unionist

I raise those questions only to challenge, or better yet, silence, those who haven't got a clue as to the meaning of the word "politics", and who get slavishly ensnared in Stephen Harper's tentacles - you know, "corruption", what a terrible thing, oh my, cut to hand-wringing.

I'm waiting for answers to my questions. I've been waiting for many years. There are no answers. It's the "big-lie" technique. Only the tragedy is, no Canadians care any more, if they ever did, about Liberal "corruption". It's a sad testament to the inability of partisan cheerleaders to summon up an original thought.

 

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

More Liberal revisionist history.

Liberals need to take a long hard look in the mirror because Liberals had 11 years of majority government to bring those policies forward.

Why didn't they? Frown

Because they were busy slashing benefits to get rid of the deficit while lowering taxes. They lost the election just when they were ready to open up the cookie jar. Then Harper got in and emptied the cookie jar.

NorthReport

What the Liberals actually did was compound the plight of the poor working Canadians by giving away the store to the corporations.

And you must mean because the Liberals were so involved in corruption like the Sponsorship Scandal don't you?

Pages