How great the idea is! Ban all handguns! Now we can have good sleep at night and worry about no guns at all. genius Mr. Martin!
Wait, is murder outlawed millenniums ago? I heard we still have murder happening every week. Hmm, interesting, why is that? Is it because those laws have never spent 2Billion dollar to implement?
Well, don’t get me wrong, I am against guns, I don’t own gun and I distance myself from those who does. I am perfectly fine with the banning of all the guns. However, what bothers me now is the enormous media coverage of this useless and hypocritical law invented by this super smart Prime Minister that again tries to cheat all of us.
I would support banning of guns 5 years ago, when gun crime is not an issue. For now, do you think the guns used to commit crime are legal? Do you think those killers would have registered their guns?
After all, do you think those murderers who defy the “no killing” laws all these years, will suddenly repent and hand-in their guns because “gun is illegal now”!?
This whole thing is about cheating for vote. Make it high tune, and high profile. So to create a perception that this genius fights crime – which Jack Layton has concluded perfectly – this guy Mr. Martin had 12 years to fight crime, and his achievement was increasing gun crime by hundreds of percentage points, and suddenly he started to fight crime at the crucial point of election with a high profile low efficient plan – is it clear what this guy is trying to fight? Yes, Mr. Martin invented this law not so much targeting gun crime, but targeting other parties namely NDP and Tory for the election.
Hey, someone says at least this gives police a tool to charge someone who possesses a gun – before they commit a crime. OK, sounds good, let alone if police really have resources to do that. Remember how Liberal explained why they wanted to de-criminalize marijuana? Yeah, exactly the opposite – policy should not charge anyone simply because they possess something.
I can adapt to either tough laws, or freedom, but it is hard for me to adapt to whatever Mr. M wants when there appears to be no rule but his personal preferences.
Thursday, December 08, 2005
Friday, December 02, 2005
A divided country - Why Liberal will go back as a minority?
This election will be a waste of time!
Liberal will go back to office as a minority government.
Why? Because their trick works! Actually the Opportunists universal trick has been proven to be very effective - divide the voters!
Provoking differences are the very subtle trick politicians during every election. However, there are few parties uses this trick so extremely - it is leading to the separate of this great country inevitably in the near future.
A quick look back to the history reveals that Quebec independent movement was conceived when liberal was trying to clan the power in early 20th century, and matured when Liberal was in power. The idea is clear, "liberate" because we are suppressed, and in a modern democratic country not too many things are harshly suppressed. Differentiate is the best tools to use to make people feel "I am mistreated". The idea was "we are Quebecors, we don't vote for Conservative, which belongs to west English speaking provinces". This type of intimidation worked well from 1920 to 1960.
However, many French colonies went independent in the '60s. It triggered a BIG question in Quebec, "If we are so different, should we be independent?" The answer is clear. Liberal played with fire, and it will burn itself ultimately - but at the cost of the whole country.
Who do you think united Quebec independent movement? Yes a former liberal cabinet minister!
To speed up the separatism movement, Liberal provoke "Quebecor's has their rights" while it runs big governments which satisfies their own hunger of power and money. One of the main reason Quebecors are not satisfied about federation was the federal government was too ambitious and reduced their choice. So on one hand, Liberal provokes "don't be managed" on the other hand it tries to manage everything. No surprise why Quebecor want to leave - the one who tells me I should not be controlled, controls me most!
Given the Liberal's excellent ability of influencing people, we can see clearly that they tried and succeeded in persuading Quebecors "distance from Conservative - which is clearly to Britain!" However, since they are proved not a viable and trustworthy group to govern, people in Quebec will have a clear choice - manage themselves!
Someone says Liberal is center line compare to NDP and Conservative. And that is why they succeeded in Quebec before Bloc came behind them. Not really. A universal rule is also proved no exception in Canada, opportunists always portrait themselves as "center line". It is not because they are mainstream, it is because this gives them leeway to change their promises!
Look at Liberal, when they found people care about health care, they jumped out to claim to be the savior of Canadian health care system. When they need money, they cut health expense much more than conservative did. And soon after they attacked Conservative for putting in new taxes, (yes, last time they entered office is because a big lie - get rid of GST), they actually enjoy the revenue more than anyone else.
Liberal has no principle, as long as it can bring them vote (during election season) or cash (after they are elected) they will go for it. So they are not right, nor left, but they are definitely not center either!
One thing to note: I am NOT saying Liberals are intentionally fuel the Quebec independence movement. They were using their trick to ensure an "in-penetrative" fort for "lefties". They failed to realize their ideology is so close to independence. If Liberal is elected back to office after Quebec separatism succeeds, I am not surprised to see Canada breaks further.
The subtle difference between radical left and opportunists is opportunists think they can use radical lefties, while in short term it is true. Because radicals are more or less desperate and more willing than moderate lefties to exchange short term support.
However, at the end, radical lefties actually leveraged opportunists' effort and achieve their goal.
Why? Because Radicals cares what they want in long term, opportunists want only power and money and are reckless. They don't care if the country really breaks a part (they say they care only to cheat for more vote). If they ever really cared about National Unity, they will have long co-operated with Conservative, not any other party. It is clear that the left a Quebec group is more likely it supports independence.
Liberal will go back to office as a minority government.
Why? Because their trick works! Actually the Opportunists universal trick has been proven to be very effective - divide the voters!
Provoking differences are the very subtle trick politicians during every election. However, there are few parties uses this trick so extremely - it is leading to the separate of this great country inevitably in the near future.
A quick look back to the history reveals that Quebec independent movement was conceived when liberal was trying to clan the power in early 20th century, and matured when Liberal was in power. The idea is clear, "liberate" because we are suppressed, and in a modern democratic country not too many things are harshly suppressed. Differentiate is the best tools to use to make people feel "I am mistreated". The idea was "we are Quebecors, we don't vote for Conservative, which belongs to west English speaking provinces". This type of intimidation worked well from 1920 to 1960.
However, many French colonies went independent in the '60s. It triggered a BIG question in Quebec, "If we are so different, should we be independent?" The answer is clear. Liberal played with fire, and it will burn itself ultimately - but at the cost of the whole country.
Who do you think united Quebec independent movement? Yes a former liberal cabinet minister!
To speed up the separatism movement, Liberal provoke "Quebecor's has their rights" while it runs big governments which satisfies their own hunger of power and money. One of the main reason Quebecors are not satisfied about federation was the federal government was too ambitious and reduced their choice. So on one hand, Liberal provokes "don't be managed" on the other hand it tries to manage everything. No surprise why Quebecor want to leave - the one who tells me I should not be controlled, controls me most!
Given the Liberal's excellent ability of influencing people, we can see clearly that they tried and succeeded in persuading Quebecors "distance from Conservative - which is clearly to Britain!" However, since they are proved not a viable and trustworthy group to govern, people in Quebec will have a clear choice - manage themselves!
Someone says Liberal is center line compare to NDP and Conservative. And that is why they succeeded in Quebec before Bloc came behind them. Not really. A universal rule is also proved no exception in Canada, opportunists always portrait themselves as "center line". It is not because they are mainstream, it is because this gives them leeway to change their promises!
Look at Liberal, when they found people care about health care, they jumped out to claim to be the savior of Canadian health care system. When they need money, they cut health expense much more than conservative did. And soon after they attacked Conservative for putting in new taxes, (yes, last time they entered office is because a big lie - get rid of GST), they actually enjoy the revenue more than anyone else.
Liberal has no principle, as long as it can bring them vote (during election season) or cash (after they are elected) they will go for it. So they are not right, nor left, but they are definitely not center either!
One thing to note: I am NOT saying Liberals are intentionally fuel the Quebec independence movement. They were using their trick to ensure an "in-penetrative" fort for "lefties". They failed to realize their ideology is so close to independence. If Liberal is elected back to office after Quebec separatism succeeds, I am not surprised to see Canada breaks further.
The subtle difference between radical left and opportunists is opportunists think they can use radical lefties, while in short term it is true. Because radicals are more or less desperate and more willing than moderate lefties to exchange short term support.
However, at the end, radical lefties actually leveraged opportunists' effort and achieve their goal.
Why? Because Radicals cares what they want in long term, opportunists want only power and money and are reckless. They don't care if the country really breaks a part (they say they care only to cheat for more vote). If they ever really cared about National Unity, they will have long co-operated with Conservative, not any other party. It is clear that the left a Quebec group is more likely it supports independence.
Thursday, December 01, 2005
Can we (still?) trust CBC?
Yeah, you know the answer. If we can, we won't need this site.
The whole idea of government funded media is anti-democracy!
The first day of the 2006 campaign, CBC National has broadcasted a report on what Canadians think the most important issues are.
The number 10 was national unity, and CBC was quick in jump in to say this gives Paul Martin an upper hand, and play a footage a "non-liberal" saying Paul Martin is the one. While talking about number 4 crime, (which ranked #2 in Toronto) they eagerly discounted the possibility people will vote based on this issue because people will care about other issues more -- wait, did people just voted this issue as #4 and national unity as #10?
As we all know fighting crime is the one of the stronghold of conservatives all around the world. I am not saying "people will not vote based on one issue" is wrong, but apparently they are not applying the same rule to all parties. I saw no reason why people will vote based on the 10th most important issue, but not 4th. But that was what CBC saying.
Other incidents like these are everywhere, while they reported first day of the campaign, Steven Harper's picture was shot from a unique (bottom up), while all other leaders had normal picture.
And when CBC report Paul Martin's attack against other leaders, they say "people fear about their …" when it reports other leaders attack Liberal, they say "Jack Layton said Paul Martin …" As if whatever Paul Martin says is fact and other leaders are "alleging".
On the second day, they were calling Steven Harper's attacking of Liberal corruption as "negative campaign". I saw no reason why stating a fact that has been confirmed by both auditor general and judges was now considered "negative campaign" but not negative political wrong doing by the Liberals.
What Canadians really need to know is what is most important to this country, if you say National unity is important, OK! Then report what Liberal has done in Quebec, and how did they do it. "Paul Martin talks about national unity in Quebec" - as if others did not talk about it. Report each parties policy about keeping this great country together, not "National Unit is on the side of Paul Martin", not even telling people why?!
Brainwash does not only happen in 3rd world country. With much more resources, Canadian media has done a much better job of brainwash Canadians.
You feel hurt, do you? "We live in a great democratic country!" yes, but our days are counted if we do not address this serious problem - those who controls our media feed us biased brainwash contents and we are paying for it!
Let's talk about this in a remote setting:
Which party do you think will win an election in China if they have real democracy there (just assume)? You guessed right, the communist party. The truth is their law does not outlaw other parties, it's just you cannot say "communism is bad". Try say Liberal is bad here in Canada, What, "no negative campaign"? Hmm, after all we are not that different uh?
It is not Chinese people like communism, they have been ripped off and the money is used to brainwash them - the media is controlled by the communist party, so no one else can run a campaign effectively.
"How dare you compare us to a 3rd world country?" Well, since 1867, Liberal was in office more than 85 years about 2/3 of the time. And Chinese communist party was in office only 56 years. Apparently from a history point of view, it seems Chinese people are not that pathetic.
The problem is not Liberal forces journalists to sing praise to Liberal. Liberal is smart enough not to get into that situation.
The problem is with "infinite" fund support journalist they like, the fair play ground for media is destroyed in Canada. Let's say, 3 journalists, one of them like Liberal and say good things about it most of the time (note not forced to, but he wants to); one is a critics of Liberal and say bad thing about liberal all the time; the third one is the most competent journalist, believing people deserve to know the truth of their leader, criticize whoever is in power.
Since no parties like to be criticized, so Journalist number 3 (the government basher) will diminished soon - he or she gets no money no matter who's in the office.
You think at least number 2 (the Liberal basher) would have survived, right? Well, not really, not only 2/3 of the time Liberal was in power in Canadian history, but also the stupid Conservative refuse to fund any journalists.
So at the end, journalist 1 (Liberal praiser) lived the best life. Not saying all the fair journalist died out, but you can tell which type is booming - who doesn't want easy money?
The whole idea of government funded media is anti-democracy!
The first day of the 2006 campaign, CBC National has broadcasted a report on what Canadians think the most important issues are.
The number 10 was national unity, and CBC was quick in jump in to say this gives Paul Martin an upper hand, and play a footage a "non-liberal" saying Paul Martin is the one. While talking about number 4 crime, (which ranked #2 in Toronto) they eagerly discounted the possibility people will vote based on this issue because people will care about other issues more -- wait, did people just voted this issue as #4 and national unity as #10?
As we all know fighting crime is the one of the stronghold of conservatives all around the world. I am not saying "people will not vote based on one issue" is wrong, but apparently they are not applying the same rule to all parties. I saw no reason why people will vote based on the 10th most important issue, but not 4th. But that was what CBC saying.
Other incidents like these are everywhere, while they reported first day of the campaign, Steven Harper's picture was shot from a unique (bottom up), while all other leaders had normal picture.
And when CBC report Paul Martin's attack against other leaders, they say "people fear about their …" when it reports other leaders attack Liberal, they say "Jack Layton said Paul Martin …" As if whatever Paul Martin says is fact and other leaders are "alleging".
On the second day, they were calling Steven Harper's attacking of Liberal corruption as "negative campaign". I saw no reason why stating a fact that has been confirmed by both auditor general and judges was now considered "negative campaign" but not negative political wrong doing by the Liberals.
What Canadians really need to know is what is most important to this country, if you say National unity is important, OK! Then report what Liberal has done in Quebec, and how did they do it. "Paul Martin talks about national unity in Quebec" - as if others did not talk about it. Report each parties policy about keeping this great country together, not "National Unit is on the side of Paul Martin", not even telling people why?!
Brainwash does not only happen in 3rd world country. With much more resources, Canadian media has done a much better job of brainwash Canadians.
You feel hurt, do you? "We live in a great democratic country!" yes, but our days are counted if we do not address this serious problem - those who controls our media feed us biased brainwash contents and we are paying for it!
Let's talk about this in a remote setting:
Which party do you think will win an election in China if they have real democracy there (just assume)? You guessed right, the communist party. The truth is their law does not outlaw other parties, it's just you cannot say "communism is bad". Try say Liberal is bad here in Canada, What, "no negative campaign"? Hmm, after all we are not that different uh?
It is not Chinese people like communism, they have been ripped off and the money is used to brainwash them - the media is controlled by the communist party, so no one else can run a campaign effectively.
"How dare you compare us to a 3rd world country?" Well, since 1867, Liberal was in office more than 85 years about 2/3 of the time. And Chinese communist party was in office only 56 years. Apparently from a history point of view, it seems Chinese people are not that pathetic.
The problem is not Liberal forces journalists to sing praise to Liberal. Liberal is smart enough not to get into that situation.
The problem is with "infinite" fund support journalist they like, the fair play ground for media is destroyed in Canada. Let's say, 3 journalists, one of them like Liberal and say good things about it most of the time (note not forced to, but he wants to); one is a critics of Liberal and say bad thing about liberal all the time; the third one is the most competent journalist, believing people deserve to know the truth of their leader, criticize whoever is in power.
Since no parties like to be criticized, so Journalist number 3 (the government basher) will diminished soon - he or she gets no money no matter who's in the office.
You think at least number 2 (the Liberal basher) would have survived, right? Well, not really, not only 2/3 of the time Liberal was in power in Canadian history, but also the stupid Conservative refuse to fund any journalists.
So at the end, journalist 1 (Liberal praiser) lived the best life. Not saying all the fair journalist died out, but you can tell which type is booming - who doesn't want easy money?
Martin Liberal is no longer liberal but LIAR
Unbelievable shameless is the only thing I can think of reading Paul Martin's response to Conservative's tax cut proposal.
Don't' get me wrong. I agree that Paul Marin was the best finance minister Canada has ever had. And I believed Jean Chrétien lost his mind preventing Paul Martin from going into power, but that was before Paul Martin became Prime Minister.
Not any more.
I still agree that Paul Martin SAYS most beautiful things among all the leading contenders. Actually that is the problem. Ok let me tell you this in a not so pretty analogy: 4 boys each wants to chase a beautiful girl, Paul Martin is the only one that can say whatever the girl likes to hear and buys her gifts in every crucial decision point; You can guess what happens next: the girl marries Paul only to find she would be a target of abuse. And all of these will be the girl and other 3 boy's fault.
Paul Martin is a VERY successful businessman. He is so good at it that he can sell you any junk for a good fortune. And after you found out what you bought from him was junk, you swore you were the dumbest idiot in the world, and would never buy from this guy again, then magically next time you see him, you still buy from him.
OK, back to the topic, why I call him a liar? Well, most politicians are liars, but I have to pick this guy out this time, as usually they don't lie so shamelessly.
Conservatives tax cut is far from good. They put in this GST thing tens of years ago "trying to fight deficit", the federal government has been running surplus for so many years, GST should have long gone. Did it? NO it is still here. So Harper's plan is so hypocritical - Conservative put in something bad, and now tries to reduce it, shall we say "thank you"?!
This is just like Liberal created health care crisis and National unity crisis yet now pretends to be the savior.
However, Paul Martin's response to Harper's plan annoys me so much. He talks so shamelessly as if there is no such a thing calls dignity or recorded history of Liberal campaign slogans.
In short, he says cut sales tax is wrong, but "Our government is committed to cutting personal income taxes "– particularly for lower and middle-income Canadians."
LIAR, basic economy knowledge tells people that sales taxes punish low income more, income taxes punish rich people more. This is because richer people tend to save a bigger portion of their income (yes, they don't need to spend ever penny on daily necessities -which means those money is not taxed by sales taxes). Lower income people need to spend nearly 100% of their income and sales tax actually taxes every penny they earn and spend.
See his detail here: http://www.liberal.ca/news_e.aspx?id=1115/
Don't get me wrong, Martin's plan benefits me more than Harper's. From a money point, I'd like Martin's plan GET IMPLEMENTED. Unfortunately, Liberal said they will get rid of GST 13 years ago, and now they are saying even cutting GST is wrong, how can I expect they don't say cutting income tax is wrong after they get elected?
Don't' get me wrong. I agree that Paul Marin was the best finance minister Canada has ever had. And I believed Jean Chrétien lost his mind preventing Paul Martin from going into power, but that was before Paul Martin became Prime Minister.
Not any more.
I still agree that Paul Martin SAYS most beautiful things among all the leading contenders. Actually that is the problem. Ok let me tell you this in a not so pretty analogy: 4 boys each wants to chase a beautiful girl, Paul Martin is the only one that can say whatever the girl likes to hear and buys her gifts in every crucial decision point; You can guess what happens next: the girl marries Paul only to find she would be a target of abuse. And all of these will be the girl and other 3 boy's fault.
Paul Martin is a VERY successful businessman. He is so good at it that he can sell you any junk for a good fortune. And after you found out what you bought from him was junk, you swore you were the dumbest idiot in the world, and would never buy from this guy again, then magically next time you see him, you still buy from him.
OK, back to the topic, why I call him a liar? Well, most politicians are liars, but I have to pick this guy out this time, as usually they don't lie so shamelessly.
Conservatives tax cut is far from good. They put in this GST thing tens of years ago "trying to fight deficit", the federal government has been running surplus for so many years, GST should have long gone. Did it? NO it is still here. So Harper's plan is so hypocritical - Conservative put in something bad, and now tries to reduce it, shall we say "thank you"?!
This is just like Liberal created health care crisis and National unity crisis yet now pretends to be the savior.
However, Paul Martin's response to Harper's plan annoys me so much. He talks so shamelessly as if there is no such a thing calls dignity or recorded history of Liberal campaign slogans.
In short, he says cut sales tax is wrong, but "Our government is committed to cutting personal income taxes "– particularly for lower and middle-income Canadians."
LIAR, basic economy knowledge tells people that sales taxes punish low income more, income taxes punish rich people more. This is because richer people tend to save a bigger portion of their income (yes, they don't need to spend ever penny on daily necessities -which means those money is not taxed by sales taxes). Lower income people need to spend nearly 100% of their income and sales tax actually taxes every penny they earn and spend.
See his detail here: http://www.liberal.ca/news_e.aspx?id=1115/
Don't get me wrong, Martin's plan benefits me more than Harper's. From a money point, I'd like Martin's plan GET IMPLEMENTED. Unfortunately, Liberal said they will get rid of GST 13 years ago, and now they are saying even cutting GST is wrong, how can I expect they don't say cutting income tax is wrong after they get elected?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)