Harper Conservatives' relentless attack on the internet

[Charles J. White]

Here is what can be done if eveyone on here is serious. The old membership list from the Canadian Alliance when it had 250,000 members still exists. If you are serious let me know, I can perhaps help. All you need is a critical mass of 40,000 to 80,000 members in a new party. It works, it worked just fine from 1993 to 2000.

Suddenly you would see the so-called "conservatives" become conservative over night.

[centrestage]

Here is what can be done if eveyone on here is serious. The old membership list from the Canadian Alliance when it had 250,000 members still exists. If you are serious let me know, I can perhaps help. All you need is a critical mass of 40,000 to 80,000 members in a new party. It works, it worked just fine from 1993 to 2000.

Suddenly you would see the so-called "conservatives" become conservative over night.

Or one could always join the fastest growing political party in Kanada 'The Undecided Party'

http://www.undecidedparty.ca/undecided/index2.html

[ChangingColours]

Here is what can be done if eveyone on here is serious. The old membership list from the Canadian Alliance when it had 250,000 members still exists. If you are serious let me know, I can perhaps help. All you need is a critical mass of 40,000 to 80,000 members in a new party. It works, it worked just fine from 1993 to 2000.

Suddenly you would see the so-called "conservatives" become conservative over night.

Or one could always join the fastest growing political party in Kanada 'The Undecided Party'

http://www.undecidedparty.ca/undecided/index2.html

Joining the "Undecided Party" won't cut it. By simply not voting you cannot effect change, since if only 1000 people show up to the polls, they still decide who gets in and gets to rule over you. To create change, you have to vote for someone, even if it's a protest vote.

[Faramir]

Your son uttered nonsense. But he was 12 and should be commended for thinking about it.

You however were the adult.

But perhaps we are talking aboutd two different things. There is a difference between not bothering to vote and refusing to vote.

I'll take his advise over your's any day.

A compromise between the 2 - go to your poll station and vote for "Bilbo Baggins". That is what I did in our provincial election.

[centrestage]

Here is what can be done if eveyone on here is serious. The old membership list from the Canadian Alliance when it had 250,000 members still exists. If you are serious let me know, I can perhaps help. All you need is a critical mass of 40,000 to 80,000 members in a new party. It works, it worked just fine from 1993 to 2000.

Suddenly you would see the so-called "conservatives" become conservative over night.

Or one could always join the fastest growing political party in Kanada 'The Undecided Party'

http://www.undecidedparty.ca/undecided/index2.html

Joining the "Undecided Party" won't cut it. By simply not voting you cannot effect change, since if only 1000 people show up to the polls, they still decide who gets in and gets to rule over you. To create change, you have to vote for someone, even if it's a protest vote.

It would seem that it really doesnt matter as who 'gets to rule over you' as obvious many Canadians feel 'their all the same' The country is run by Francophones and that will never change.

They all lean to the left.

Wheres our version of the american tea party?

www.languagefairness.ca/

[centrestage]

The TruthXposed -- you be the judged. Did any of has have a voice. Nope cause the politicians really dont want to hear what we have to say.

http://thetruthxposed.com

[Hailey]

So, is anyone interested in actually doing something about this, or do we sit around and wait to be picked off because we don't want to hurt Harper's feelings?

I have to say, I'm frustrated.

Connie, I feel rather dense because everyone else seems to be getting it but I am having a hard time wrapping my head around this.

[Peter O'Donnell]

I think Harper is very close to that late Mulroney tipping point where large numbers of loyalists start to develop the same fatal unease that the earlier dissidents developed. At some point, the negatives start to outweigh the perceived positives and the hope for the further positives fades in the realization that if time had been the real problem, that time has now come and gone.

Sooner or later, the realization sinks in, this man is not who we thought he was, nor who we hoped he would be, and although nobody is perfect and some deviation from course can be tolerated in an imperfect (i.e. human) world, at some point, larger principles overwhelm that cautious and perhaps overly fair-minded approach, to produce the call for change.

This is about where we stand with Harper, the problem being that the alternatives are so dreadful that one needs to do nothing much more than stand still or drift slowly left to appear a relatively enticing proposition.

[Fabulous Fred]

A LOT of Canadians are extremely angry about wasting more than One Billion dollars for three days of security protecting persons we would much rather see walk down dark alleys at night in the east L.A. shouting racial epithets.

[Monorprise]

I find it funny how the government can think he has both the right and duty to "protect" people from content on the Internet, or really any medium for that matter, but the Internet is the most inexpiable.

As no content on the Internet comes to you unless you in someway ask for it.


I can see Government legitimately going after hackers and virus malware writers who actualy do damage and/or steal property. But people who simply give words and images to those that request it? madness.


If this were the United States Federal Government I would ask what happen to the 1st amendment? Where in the Constitution did we give Government this abusive power to tell us what speech we can and cannot hear and view.

[NeoLuddite]

[ There is a difference between not bothering to vote and refusing to vote.[/quote]

Methinks it's our democratic duty to vote. If you as a voter have no confidence in any of the listed candidates just spoil your ballot by writing in "None of the above". Holding your nose and voting for the least objectionable candidate just encourages the clowns.

If enough of us did that the PTB might get the hint, but I rather doubt we could disabuse any of them of their hubris that easily.

A write in vote would be a welcome amendment to our electoral process.
Ain't gonna happen anytime soon. <sigh>

[D. Johnson]

We need a Wildrose Alliance.....Federally.

Indeed. We need it now. The CPC isn't going to cut it (regardless if there are those who think Harper will pull through if he gets a majority.)

There's no one else worth voting for so many feel stuck with the don't vote or vote for the least despicable and Harper wins that coin toss.

As for we need a Wildrose Alliance federally, we had one and we all know how that went.

We have one too. It's already been co-opted by Harper's Boys. We called it the Wildrose Alliance.

[Hubert Mitchell]

Red Tories show their true colors yet again!

[pirapoi]

Update:

C-21 An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act -
Received Royal Assent: June 18, 2008

C-22 Protecting Children from Online Sexual Exploitation Act
1st Reading December 7, 2010 (Senate)

C-27 Electronic Commerce Protection Act
Reintroduced as C-28. Received Royal Assent: December 15, 2010

C-46 Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act
C-51 (formerly C-46) - 1st reading - November 1st, 2010

C-47 Technical Assistance for Law Enforcement in the 21st Century Act
Bill C-52 (formerly C-47) 1st Reading November 1st, 2010

C-61 An Act to amend the Copyright Act
Reintroduced as C-32.
Received 2nd reading November 5, 2010

[feduptaxpayer]

When people fear government, it is tyranny. When government fears people, it is democracy.