"Brian Baloney"??? wow... Next thing we're going to see an Maurice Duplesis reference
Posted by Anonymous to Our Town and Its Business at 9 July 2014 07:31
*********************
You obviously know something of history. But a number of Prime Ministers served between Maurice Duplesis and Brian Mulroney. Duplessis and Mulroney's names remain.
Here's. something you may not know. People always remember politicians who help and never forget those who betray them.
A virus infects modern politics . It's little understood how much a person's vote means to them. It may be what they value most. It is not lightly bestowed.
A significant factor in the provincial election was an increase in numbers who went to the polls not to vote but instead deliberately choose to withhold their vote. They deposited unmarked ballots.
It 's the reason Rob Ford's numbers stayed up no matter what the media pulled with the assistance of the Toronto Police Association.
What the Ford brothers understand about Toronto politics........probably learned from their father. ...is the reason they do not surrender.
It's not a deeply held intellectual secret. It's an intuition of politics....care for and respect the people you serve....including you those whose vote you didn't win.
The battle in Toronto is not between Rob Ford, John Tory ,Olivia Chow
The battle is between the Fords , Toronto media with full support of the out of control Toronto Police Association.
It's not about scandal. It's about power.
People power ...media power....and Police Union Power.
It's an almighty struggle. .... A hurricane approaching land....twisting and turning.... Tory and Chow ....... corks tossing in the turmoil....Ford battered but steadfast in the eye of the storm.
Of the challengers, Olivia Chow has a better understanding of the
natural force of politics.
John Tory is an intellectual snob.
How many times has he demanded the Mayor resign with no apparent understanding of the implications if what he is sayin
Rob Ford is neither an intellectual nor a snob.and obviously does not intend to resign.
He could have done that a long time ago and saved himself and others. a whale of a lot of grief.
Wednesday, 9 July 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
15 comments:
Oh, man, I wish he would resign !
It is not going to be possible to watch without cringing. No one will emerge from that election un-scathed.
During 2010 I never paid much attention to other places & their races. This time I am watching reluctantly. That first time with Aurora politics got me hooked & that does not seem to be a good thing. Blissful ignorance was easier on the nervous system.
I know something about history. First of all, Brian Mulroney was a Canadian Prime Minister and Maurice Duplesis was a Quebec Premier.
Interestingly they were both conservative party leaders and those that dislike their legacy are usually more left leaning.
Mulroney and Harris both strike fear into the hearts of the liberals. But history will judge them on their actions, not a bunch of left-leaning scare mongers.
Forget Mulroney was a conservative. He took cash money stuffed in envelopes from an arms dealer and put it in his pocket without declaring it. When he was caught he told his accountants to call Canada Revenue and cut him a deal - declare it and pay the taxes without a penalty. Such provisions exist and he took full advantage of them.
Furthermore, he failed to mention all of this while testifying in his civil suit against the government. Did he commit perjury? Probably not, as he claims he was never asked the direct question.
I believe he sued the government as he claimed his reputation was sullied. Some reputation.
With Duplessis, the legacy was ill-treatment of kids & the connection with the church. That will never be forgotten. The residual damage still festers in Quebec politics today.
12:44
Sadly Mulroney successfully sued the gov't of the day. There has never been an apology as far as I know.
You know something?
I am getting fed up to the point of ying-yang with the subject of politics and politicians.
They are the same the world over.
They seek office not to serve the public but to serve themselves.
They suck up our money and our blood in the name of service.They should be banned from existence, even those who think they are contributing to our knowledge and understanding.
All of you - BE GONE!!!
@13:57
Biting the hand that reads you?
13:57
Yes, like everyone else out there including you, me and the neighbour, they do things to serve themselves. Everyone does things for their reasons, not for yours or mine. The politician is no different. The problem is that so many people think of them as being ultruistic that serving the public is like some calling to do some higher good. And then we put them on some pedestal and hold them to a higher moral and ethical standard and feel betrayed when they fail us. They are only people - no better, no worse than the average - all of us with our own strengths, our own weaknesses and at times our own failings. The difference is that they feel the internal need to put themselves out there and run for office (again for their reasons - it is their decision to do so). The fault perhaps is in our expectations - of what and who we thought they were from the marketing of their personality. Why do we think the politician will be any better than the average?
15:40
This is nonsense.
Why do some become effective leaders while the rest plod along following? These are a rare and endangered species.
But the vast majority of present day politicians are so ordinary, so average. That's why we have the mess we are in. And most of us don't even bother to vote anymore.
19:09
Speak for yourself. I voted and all others in the family went to the polls. Although 2 of them returned their ballots.
Yes 19:09, "why do some become effective leaders while the rest plod along following?" that's one of the million dollars questions isn't it. How could w bottle that and give it to the others and the rest of us? When you say "present day politicians are so ordinary, so average", do you think that those of the past were really any better? And if so what was better about them? How do you define an effective leader? What is it that you are looking for in the next crop that will be elected?
I’m not 19:09, but I can tell you that I want the next crop not to spend money on “improving my quality of life”. Take care of the assets that we have already! Stop spending money on new projects with the plan to pay for them with this so called “debt financing” BS!
9:35
Each of us is unique when one combines genetics and life experiences.
Some become great artists, great writers and playwrights, great architects, great engineers, great scientists, great doctors and great medical researchers, great teachers and some even become great political leaders.
It is impossible to predict which of us will attain greatness, which of us will attain the ability to lead in a discipline or at the head of a government.
Churchill was a great political leader as was Franklin Roosevelt, and while you may not like the inclusion of the next two, Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin, they must also be named. The first two fought on the side of good, the latter on the side of evil. You can throw in Napoleon and Alexander the Great, Peter the Great and Queen Elizabeth I. More recently Deng Xiaoping who wrought an economic miracle in his country
The past is filled with mediocre "leaders," be they elected or anointed by God as a King or a Queen. There have been great Popes and throughly wicked ones.
In the context of history the right to vote is relatively new, even more recent for women and more recent yet again for black Americans
A leader has to be capable of engendering trust among his or her people and have plans that are in the best interest of the majority. The last Ontario election saw a Hudak election platform that was flawed and economically unsound, and he was dramatically defeated.
A couple of great Canadian leaders that come to mind are Bill Davis, and while he has his flaws, Pierre Trudeau, who managed to repatriate the Constitution and gave us the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These two alone outweigh his mistakes.
A leader must make mistakes but hopefully they will be relatively minor when compared with his total accomplishments.
Stephen Harper is not really a leader, he is a demagogue. I read in the last day or so about the Conservative Party creating half hour videos weekly featuring Harper, portraying him as almost the star of his own television show, promoting his government's propaganda relentlessly, and all at taxpayer cost.
The F-35 fighter jet has all of a sudden been seen as rather impractical for Canada. It has a single engine. There was a fire in the engine of one of these planes at a U.S. air force base. Can you visualize this plane patrolling our arctic airspace when all of a sudden the engine quits. The pilot will have to eject and hopefully will come to earth on solid ground rather than into the frigid water where his survival time would be short. If he was fortunate enough to land on ice he might have to contend with one or two polar bears - survival not so good.
Our federal government has squandered billions. Just look at the Stats Can census abortion.
Is our Prime Minster a leader? No way in Hell.
Joe fontana is collecting letters of good character before his sentencing next week.
Post a Comment