conservative party

more correspondence with Markham-Unionville Green Party rep., Elvin Kao

October 9, 2015 Incoherent ramblings No comments , , , , ,

I’d asked of Elvin Kao, the local green party candidate

It is refreshing to hear of this party position on whipping votes, and on bill C-51.  Can you please provide me a reference to the location of your party documentation where that no-whip policy is stated.
Asking CSIS for conclusive data that supports their funding is like asking somebody “would you like a raise?”.  You will surely be returned data that will support the case for more and more invasive policing.
I also asked about your position on Canada’s military.  My logical expectation that the Green party position on offensive military would be severe, since Military forces everywhere are easily argued to be the most flagrant and blatant polluters in existence.  Consider, for example, the environmental damage of all the nuclear bombs that have been deployed and tested, the all-species genetic damage due to depleted Uranium deployment in Iraq, and the intense carbon footprint of so many air, ground, and water fleets.  Does your party take an explicit position on the scale and deployment of Canada’s military forces?
What is your position on the Canadian bombing of Syria?  Recalling other such targets like Serbia, it is easy to see that Canada has been historically complicit as acting as a proxy for the United States in its zeal to bring peace with bombs.  I find it odd that there is lots of coverage in the Canadian press on the Syrian refugee crisis, but nothing on our direct contribution to that crisis.

His response:

The Green party does not have whipped votes.
https://www.greenparty.ca/en/convention-2014/voting/motions/g14-p31

We want government reform that will end all whipped votes, so that MPs can represent their constituents.
http://www.greenparty.ca/en/democratic-reform

In terms of CSIS and showing results for the allocation of resources should not be a proposition they should be shocked at and is the kind of oversight that should be mandatory so that we do not have unnecessary government overhead.

The Green party believes that Canada should be a peace keeping country, and will only engage in war as a last resort. Any strike on a nation or group should have approval from UN Security Council. Canada for the first time has disappeared from international stage as it has lost its seat from the UN Security Council. In terms of scale of Canadian forces deployment based on environmental impact, there is no policy. With Canadian and other lives to consider during those moments, I do not believe we should consider the environmental impact in those instances and we should make sure that our Canadian troops are well equipped. The environmental impact is small compared to Canadian industries, producing everyday, and other polluting problems.

Canada has lost its touch as a peace keeping country and has blindly followed all US led missions. I do not believe that air strikes in that region are helping, and creates more radicals for western hatred. There is too much conflict between multiple groups in the Syrian civil war and it would be difficult to choose sides.

Thanks for the questions,

I have a lot of trouble with anybody that bandies about the putrid peace keeping doublespeak when it really means warfare, often blatantly offensive warfare.  Elvin is already working hard at speaking in the meaningless way of a politician despite being really new to the game.

Just because the UN, effectively a puppet organization for the United States, sanctions the oppression of the current enemy de-jour, doesn’t mean that it is something that I want to be funding with the taxes that are collected from me like it or not.

It appears that I am left without any representation in the current collection of candidates for my riding.  The liberal and conservative parties are for all intents and purposes the same despite the different colours that they use in the advertising.  When push comes to shove a leader from on-high, serving interests that we’ll never know the full details of, sets the party policy and party members who choose to deviate will be expelled.  Most probably wouldn’t care to rock the boat and are willyfully ignorant to the fact that they are meaningless and purposeless.  The NDP is a communist party want-to-be, and I can’t vote for them.  Collective socialism has killed hundreds of millions of people so far.  How many more people have to die before people finally realize it’s a bad idea?  I don’t believe that a vote for the NDP means we’ll have any immediate prospect of such death here in Canada, but taking any steps in that direction doesn’t seem prudent.

I don’t trust the language that this Green party rep uses.  He appears to be is trying too hard to be a politician, which essentially means a liar.  Perhaps he’s the least evil of the options around, but I may just explicitly vote none of the above.

Toike politics

October 1, 2015 Incoherent ramblings No comments , , , , , , ,

toikePolitics

 

Kudos to the Toike once again.  They really nailed the conservative ad.  I’m not old enough to know what Trudeau senior’s politics were nor how they compare to junior, so that’s hard to comment on.  What I do know of Trudeau is that he has demonstrated the same will to institute an unbounded police state, by voting and forcing Liberal voting for C-51, as Harper and head KGB want-a-be Minister Blainey.  That’s score zero for votes from me for the blue and the red.

Since I don’t like a policy of unbounded tax hikes the NDP won’t get my vote.

The only option left for my riding is the Green party.  The Toike’s description of “fuzzy” is exactly what the Green party platform looked like last go round, so unless they’ve improved that really leaves “None of the Above” as my only option.

I expect that all the parties are playing the same game, seeing who can “promise” the most for “free”, where free means funded out of taxes extracted from us and future generations … like it or not.  What a sham this election farce is!  How can people delude themselves into thinking that one vote every few years to a representative that will probably ignore you once elected, or not be elected, is somehow representation.