Danny Williams lowers the Canadian Flag

[Infanteer]

I have already "pledged my allegiance",   three times over in fact, to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors.....

Unfortunately, that won't be too acceptable when the fragmented remains of Confederation are faced with either applying to the Union or facing obscurity as the Northern version of Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala.... ;D

 

[Glorified Ape]

Thank you, that seems to spell my concern out very clearly.  I prefer living in a functioning state as opposed to a disintergrating feudal arrangement.

For all those "provincials", better start working on the the following:

"I Pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation...."

Precisely, though it appear's we're in minority these days - everyone seems to prefer inter-governmental bickering than productive governance. Which is a problem that's going to bite us in the ass precisely the way you've characterized it.

Yeah, debt-free, lower taxes, lowest unemployment.  I can see how terrible Alberta has become.  Oh, did I mention that this fiscal year we are the only province paying in to provincial transfers?  I'm not complaining about it though, as it's part of confederation.  I noticed that after telling us not to bitch about the provinces, because you're sick of it, you decide to bitch about the leader of mine?  Hypocracy, thy name is Glorified Ape.  Clever.  And Cheers.

T

Don't forget to add "grappling with the human rights commission on issues of social ludditism" to Alberta's achievements. I suppose Klein's great if you like a homophobic, militarily aggressive nation led by a drug addict (sounds strangely familiar...) with a balanced budget.

Where did I bitch about Klein? I offered my opinion of him, given mo-litia's assertions as to his admirability. If we're going to classify every critical opinion as "whining" then we're going to have a problem. Bitching about immutable facts of federalism by millions is one thing, casting aspersions on a politician for his policies and undesirable personal qualities is quite another. 

Feel free to hop off the danglies whenever it's convenient.

 

[Infanteer]

I'm not going to comment on Klein's governance of his Province (ok - I will, I've felt it has been pretty damn good), - but it appears to me that he's using his political currency to drive a further wedge between Alberta and the Rest of Canada (which isn't cool) rather then capitalizing on his record of effective administration to teach the Federal government a thing or two about how to run your mandate.

However, I am going to restate my belief that this statement is fundamentally true:

Precisely, though it appear's we're in minority these days - everyone seems to prefer inter-governmental bickering than productive governance. Which is a problem that's going to bite us in the ass precisely the way you've characterized it.

Listening to all this blustering for an independent Newfoundland is comical at best.   Why don't we focus on true national problems such as our creaking social programs, our weakened military capabilities, and securing the North American continent with our Southern Allies rather than arguing over the kitchen scraps with a "me first" attitude.

 

[Glorified Ape]

I'm not going to comment on Klein's governance of his Province (ok - I will, I've felt it has been pretty damn good), - but it appears to me that he's using his political currency to drive a further wedge between Alberta and the Rest of Canada (which isn't cool) rather then capitalizing on his record of effective administration to teach the Federal government a thing or two about how to run your mandate.

However, I am going to restate my belief that this statement is fundamentally true:

Listening to all this blustering for an independent Newfoundland is comical at best.   Why don't we focus on true national problems such as our creaking social programs, our weakened military capabilities, and securing the North American continent with our Southern Allies rather than arguing over the kitchen scraps with a "me first" attitude.

Ironically, it's that "me first" attitude that doesn't just screw the country but the provinces vis a vis each other. With all of them clubbing each other like baby seals to get a leg up, all their "the provinces must be united against the feds" rhetoric is shown to be BS.

I agree we should be focusing on the REAL problems, not on institutional arrangements. This is so difficult nowadays because everytime we try to focus on a problem (like military funding) we end up with half a dozen provinces screaming "our healthcare needs the money more". I guess it comes down to the fact that some policies just can't come true unless a crisis comes around to give everyone a rude awakening.

 

[Torlyn]

Don't forget to add "grappling with the human rights commission on issues of social ludditism" to Alberta's achievements. I suppose Klein's great if you like a homophobic, militarily aggressive nation led by a drug addict (sounds strangely familiar...) with a balanced budget.

Where did I bitch about Klein? I offered my opinion of him, given mo-litia's assertions as to his admirability. If we're going to classify every critical opinion as "whining" then we're going to have a problem. Bitching about immutable facts of federalism by millions is one thing, casting aspersions on a politician for his policies and undesirable personal qualities is quite another. 

Feel free to hop off the danglies whenever it's convenient.

To the first, it's politically convenient.  By railing against gay marriages, he's securing the rural areas of Alberta, and given that he's perfectly aware he's powerless to do anything about it, isn't concerned with changing anything, thereby not loosing any more of the urban vote.

How is he homophobic?  Not wanting gay marriages from a political standpoint is one thing, but questioning the guy's character when you don't really know him is ludicrous.  And for the record, he's not homophobic.

Militarily aggressive?  How so?

Drug addict?  Given that you've overtly claimed that your first application was denied because you admitted to prior drug use, again I see hypocrisy rearing it's ugly head.

Danglies?  Please.  Try not to be so juvenile.

T

 

[ex_coelis]

Listening to all this blustering for an independent Newfoundland is comical at best.   Why don't we focus on true national problems such as our creaking social programs, our weakened military capabilities, and securing the North American continent with our Southern Allies rather than arguing over the kitchen scraps with a "me first" attitude.

Comedy is always such an individual thing, no?  Justify your comment please.  [Let me beat you to a possible punchline, if you want to say 'look how much money Canada pumps into Newfoundland, they couldn't survive without the equalization payments', please do some research, anything other than that, fire away]

I'm thinking of a province that is having a hard time paying for it's social programs.   Thet province sees that it might be able to balance it's books and pay for it's social programs if it receives it's agreed upon share of revenues from a resource that it brought into this country.  That possibility is now being thwarted due to a lying PM who is recinding his word.  The same PM who as finance minister accelerated the gutting of our military.  

As far as, 'politicians lie, get over it', one motto I learned to live by in the CF is 'never pass a fault', I have few hates in my life, but liers and thieves are two of them.  So what should we do according to your philosophy?   We let Martin off on his word, continue our economic dependency as our resources are siphoned away forever, then sit back and be called a 'vast and scenic welfare state'?   FU*K THAT!  I'm not letting him off with shi*.   If that you think lying politicians are acceptable, then continue voting for those with a proven record, the Liberal Part of Canada.  But, don't hold your breath on restoring the military, or sorting out things with the US, or maybe even banking on cheap electricity from Churchill Falls.

Kitchen scraps?  You either have quite a kitchen or have no idea how much is at stake.  

I know a billion dollars wouldn't even pay for this governments gun registry, or even it's Quebec advertising slush funds, but it's still a lot of dosh, and we badly need it.

BTW:  Did you take a moment to read Crosbies column in the Sun on the last page?  Are there bigger issues facing Canada as a whole?  Yes.  Are there bigger issues facing Newfoundland right now? Nope.  This is a defining issue and one worth talking about.  If it's not important to you, which is definitely your perogative, what are you doing writing in this thread.  

I can suggest some other sites for threads regarding social services, and other threads here regarding our military co-operation with the US.

Give'r

 

[ex_coelis]

Ironically, it's that "me first" attitude that doesn't just screw the country but the provinces vis a vis each other. With all of them clubbing each other like baby seals to get a leg up, all their "the provinces must be united against the feds" rhetoric is shown to be BS.

I agree we should be focusing on the REAL problems, not on institutional arrangements. This is so difficult nowadays because everytime we try to focus on a problem (like military funding) we end up with half a dozen provinces screaming "our healthcare needs the money more". I guess it comes down to the fact that some policies just can't come true unless a crisis comes around to give everyone a rude awakening.

You cannot see the forest for the trees, as far as this discussion is concerned.

 

[Glorified Ape]

To the first, it's politically convenient.  By railing against gay marriages, he's securing the rural areas of Alberta, and given that he's perfectly aware he's powerless to do anything about it, isn't concerned with changing anything, thereby not loosing any more of the urban vote.

The gay marriage thing is the tip of the iceberg - Vriend v. Alberta represented another issue. I don't think it's any secret that Alberta isn't exactly the most gay-friendly province in the country. 

How is he homophobic?  Not wanting gay marriages from a political standpoint is one thing, but questioning the guy's character when you don't really know him is ludicrous.  And for the record, he's not homophobic.

I dunno, call me crazy but I just get this strange inkling that someone's homophobic (or anti-gay, which I prefer since homophobic implies fear) when the government they're leading vehemently resists any expansion of gay rights, even simply towards equality.

Militarily aggressive?  How so?

I'm basing that entirely on Iraq. If he supports the US like he claims he does, then he necessarily supports aggressive war-making.

Drug addict?  Given that you've overtly claimed that your first application was denied because you admitted to prior drug use, again I see hypocrisy rearing it's ugly head.

Drug use does not an addict make - you should know that. When I start stumbling into homeless shelters, drunk or high off my ass, you can call me an addict, though I haven't used drugs since highschool.

Danglies?  Please.  Try not to be so juvenile.

T

It was a joke, which I would have indicated with a smiley if I hadn't already used two in that post and have a heartfelt belief in one admin's suggestion that people refrain from over-smileying. I'm wondering, though, if it was the term or the statement you're taking issue with. Would "testicles" have appeased your superior maturity? Indeed, one wonders if you haven't been around since Genesis. 

You cannot see the forest for the trees, as far as this discussion is concerned.

Elaborate?

 

[ex_coelis]

Glorified Ape,

Saying that paying for social programs is an important issue, and Newfoundland getting it's share of oil revenues is not, means that you cannot see the forest for the trees.  
(Do I really need to explain this?)

For Newfoundland, Quebec earning nearly $900,000,000 annually on Newfoundland hydroelectricity, with NFLD earning $20,000,000 annually and footing the bill for keeping the place running is one reason that Quebec can better pay for it's social programs and Newfoundland cannot.   Fair?  

The oil royalty situation is a newer, but similar situation, this time with the federal government rather than Quebec.   Resources flowing away without the province getting a fair share of the revenue results in the province not being able to properly fund it's social responsibilites.

Want to talk about social programmes in Newfoundland, welcome to the debate about oil royalties.   Want to talk about Federal Social Spending, I'm sure there are threads about it, probably not here.

Clear enough?  

 

[Infanteer]

Comedy is always such an individual thing, no?  Justify your comment please.  [Let me beat you to a possible punchline, if you want to say 'look how much money Canada pumps into Newfoundland, they couldn't survive without the equalization payments', please do some research, anything other than that, fire away]

I'm not disputing the political clash between the Newfoundland Government and the Liberal Government; judging from the last 12 years of Liberal rule, I'm willing to wager that it is probably valid.  What I am criticising is all the chatter about Newfoundland (or any other Province) leaving the country over an allocation issue - I really don't think highly of the Premier hauling down the flag; rather then "get at" the Martin government it is an insult to those who value the idea of the Canadian nation.

Here's the deal, you can turn Newfoundland into Georgia and I'll be Sherman.  Your move, Se'ech....

 

[Kirkhill]

Here's the deal, you can turn Newfoundland into Georgia and I'll be Sherman.  Your move, Se'ech....

Pretty lame Infanteer, not your best.  Rethink?

 

[ex_coelis]

Here's the deal, you can turn Newfoundland into Georgia and I'll be Sherman.   Your move, Se'ech....

.... Under Sherman's orders Capt. O. M. Poe "thoroughly destroyed Atlanta, save its mere dwelling-houses and churches." The destruction was by fire purposely applied to buildings, and permitted to spread, as was expected, from house to house until the defenseless city was almost entirely reduced to ashes. No efforts were made to prevent the spread of the conflagration, and scarcely any structure was designedly spared. Only about 450 buildings escaped this ruthless burning, among them many churches, which in those days generally stood apart from other buildings. The thoroughness of the destruction can be realized, when we consider that by the census of 1860 Atlanta had a population of 10,000, which in 1864 had increased to 14,000. More than 4,000 houses, including dwellings, shops, stores, mills and depots were burned, about eleven-twelfths of the city. Capt. Daniel Oakey, of the Second Massachusetts volunteers, says: "Sixty thousand of us witnessed the destruction of Atlanta, while our post band and that of the Thirty-third Massachusetts played martial airs and operatic selections." Sherman himself noted the rising columns of smoke as he rode away from the city. Considering that he had been in possession of the city since the 3d of September, he had had ample time to utterly destroy everything in it that could be of advantage to an enemy, without the wanton and inexcusable method to which he resorted. It was no more necessary from a military point of view to destroy mercantile establishments than private dwellings or churches. The destruction of Atlanta can never be excused. The name of the Federal commander will always be associated with this barbarous act. ..

Is this what you're threatening?   Big words, ever actually visited the place?   Georgia ain't Newfoundland, you ain't Sherman, and you should be ashamed.

 

[Art Johnson]

I wish!  When was the last time we had an Ontarian as PM???  Lester Pearson 1968.

Good grief I hope you are not bragging about Lester B, that SOD should have been put up against the wall and shot with a ball of hi own S-H-I-T. He is another one of those communists that it is difficult to pin down because the records have been purged. I have been trying for years to link him with Burgess and McLean but the trail has been well covered. His FAG buddy who committed susuicideas the Ambassador to Egypt was another member of that CABAL that was running Canada.

 

[Infanteer]

Good grief Mr Johnson, and I thought I was an angry man.... >

Anyways, I see that my Civil War analogy had its intended effect.   Debates about Sherman's campaign aside, I hear an echo of many of the arguments made by Southern States prior to Succession in 1860-1861, and my comment was intended to underline the gravity of my opinion on this conversation.   Soldiers wear the Canadian Flag on their shoulders, not some fruit salad of various Provincial artwork.   For some reason, amidst all the talk of leaving Canada, the views of those loyal to Canada first and foremost have been repeatedly dismissed as "just another example of Canadians picking on Newfoundlanders, thinking were bums, yadayadayada...."   I assure you it's not.

I've granted (twice now) that the province has a valid gripe with the Federal Government - hell, being from the West, I'm sure you've probably got your fill of complaints from out here.   However, I draw a line between solving a political dispute and advocating the dismemberment of our country by starting the domino effect.   For once we start to contemplate abandoning the idea of Canada, I may as well not bother to try and put on the uniform anymore because there is nothing to defend due to the fact that the rug was pulled out from underneath.   Just as you're mad about things not going the way you'd like in your corner of Canada, I'm equally incensed with the apparent disregard for any notion of national loyalty that the Premier has shown (and some here have been quick to rally to).

This is the last I'm going to say - as far as I'm concerned this thread is on its way down the tube.   You can sit on your Rock and rail about the injustices that you've been the sole target of and in the process tell the rest of Canada to piss off, or you can come off your high Newfoundland horse and attempt to offer a political solution that perhaps, wonder of wonders, benefits all Canadians (yes, you're one of those too).

Infanteer Out

 

[Bograt]

or you can come off your high Newfoundland horse and attempt to offer a political solution that perhaps, wonder of wonders, benefits all Canadians (yes, you're one of those too).

Infanteer,

I'm sure that if this discussion were happening over a beer you wouldn't be so quick to take that poisition. It appears we have a clash of cultures here (for lack of a better term). It kind of remids me the traditional follies of cross cultural communication one would have if travelling to rural Africa. There is a history here that I do not believe some have appreciated how it has effected the debate. With all do respect to PEI and the other Martime provinces, Newfoundland is the only province to choose to enter confederation, and it was only 55 years ago. With the history of Federal/Newfoundland (as articulately outlined by Mr. Crosbie) I believe it is easy to understand why there is a sense of disenfranchisement with the current relationship. We are not sitting on a high horse, but rather standing up- we are a tall people, I can see how you could be confused.

I understand and sympathize with your position regarding some of the separation rhetoric you may have interpreted. I classify the minority who bark this idea into three groups:

1. The call in show inteligensia (If you ever heard a NL call in show you would apprieciate the humour)
2. Lottery winners (These are the types who would divorce their spouces once they won the lottery and try and keep secret their fortune)
3. Moths. They see a bright light and are attacted to it... unfortunately it is a flame.

I think this debate illustrates the fractured nature of confederation. I get the sense that the only people who believe we are on the right course are the people in the economic center. I thhink it is because our leaders are not leaders of countries, but rather leaders of their political party- glorified Rotarians with the funny hats.

 

[Cakear]

. . . What I am criticising is all the chatter about Newfoundland (or any other Province) leaving the country over an allocation issue - I really don't think highly of the Premier hauling down the flag; rather then "get at" the Martin government it is an insult to those who value the idea of the Canadian nation.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in everything I've read and seen, I have yet to hear Danny mention anything about going it alone or seperating from Canada.   In fact, I heard him tell reporters he's a staunchly proud Canadian who cheered for the CDNs at the World Juniors.   Pulling down the flag was simply to show his and (if public support in NF is any indication) the province's dissatisfaction with how the Federation of Canada (of which the flag is but a symbol) is being run . . . is breaking promises.   Can ANYONE deny that a self-sufficient Newfoundland and Labrador would not benefit the rest of Canada in the end?

 

[Bograt]

Can ANYONE deny that a self-sufficient Newfoundland and Labrador would not benefit the rest of Canada in the end?

That's not the question that federal government is wrestling with. The question is "Can ANYONE deny that a self-sufficient Newfoundland and Labrador would not benefit the national Liberal Party?" My take, is a self sufficient Newfoundland would abandon the grits.

These are the same guys who in one breath say"The Tories believe you ave a culture of dependency" and in the other the say"The Tories will take away your EI." Once they no longer can bargain with our tax money, what else do they have?

I believe we are small c conservative here. Traditional family values, provincial empowerment, taxation exhaustion- but we have become dependant on federal handouts.

 

[Bograt]

Canadian flags are flying once again at provincial government buildings. Premier Danny Williams issued the order for the flags to go up again as of 1pm today. They were removed on December 23rd as a statement to the federal government on the province's displeasure with talks on offshore revenue sharing. It was a move that sparked debate and controversy across the country.

Support for Premier Danny Williams' stand on the Atlantic Accord continues to grow. Williams was Randy Simms' in-studio guest on VOCM's Open Line today. Williams went on record thanking the people of the province. Williams says the federal government still considers Newfoundland and Labrador a secondary province in Canada. The premier says after the meeting in Winnipeg last month, he was even more convinced Ottawa never had any intention of reaching a deal with the province.

 

[a_majoor]

That's not the question that federal government is wrestling with. The question is "Can ANYONE deny that a self-sufficient Newfoundland and Labrador would not benefit the national Liberal Party?" My take, is a self sufficient Newfoundland would abandon the grits.

The argument is probably correct, but it doesn't explain why other "have not" provinces (in the sense that their proportion of equalization payments is higher than the taxes they pay out to Ottawa) such as Manitoba, Quebec or Saskatchewan have abandoned the Grits as their "Federal" party.

 

[Cakear]

Bograt,

I'm not entirely convinced that's the problem with the Feds here . . . I'm more inclined to believe it's ALL about money.  I'd be pretty confident in comparing this to the whole "getting rid of the GST" election made by Chrétien and the Liberals a few years back.  It was a hasty election promise made prior to actually looking at the books and how much $$$ they'd be forfeiting.

Although I have no actual proof (Bruce  ;D ) . . . I'd wager my 3 kids that the conservatives wouldn't be behaving any differently if they were in power . . .