x

[SevenSeasJim]

To be honest I really want a leader that I can be proud of. It hasn't happened in my life time.

[d_rawk]

24 hour open bars like the UK just started

:laugh:

[d_rawk]

"Well, the ban on handguns only partially addressed the issue. What we really want to hear and we're hoping that the prime minister will announce, you know, measures that are going to address the underlying causes -- the root causes of gun violence." – Sandra Carnegie-Douglas, Jamaican-Canadian Association, CBC Newsworld, 8 December 2005

"Thousands of people have been crying the same thing. We need help. We need programs, after-school programs for the kids. Put the funding where it's needed. Why is a community centre in Thornhill where people already have pools and tennis courts in their houses open late and the community centre in the Jane and Finch area is not? We have tons of recent police. They're saying it's scary to keep a community centre open." – Mark Dezilva, Community coordinator in Toronto's Jane-Finch area, CTV NewsNet, 8 December 2005

"I would tell him [Paul Martin] to mainly keep his promises. Like, when we elected him the first time he said that he promised a lot of stuff that he was going to do. Until today we have not seen those promises that he promised to do. Why should we re-elect him? And honestly, this is a public community centre. If you were to come to a community centre, why would the public not be allowed in? We are the ones that should be electing you. We should have the questions for you." – Unidentified sister of a 19-year old Toronto shooting victim, CTV NewsNet, 8 December 2005

"Look, we need community centres, or we can build jails later on. Pay me now, or pay me later," – Walter McIntyre, associate pastor with Kipling Avenue Baptist Church, also a member of the Etobicoke Strategy, a group of pastors and police working to reduce crime in north Etobicoke. Etobicoke Guardian, December 7, 2005

[Birdy]

i particularly like the quote from walter mcintyre.. so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so true.

[d_rawk]

Good points, all of them. Thanks SugarMegs.

[AD]

when will the liberals be releasing their platform?

ad

[d_rawk]

Once they're done milking the news cycles with individual policy announcements.

None of the parties have released their comprehensive platforms as of yet.

[d_rawk]

... in the meantime, this site is helpful:

CTV's tracking of party positions for election 2006

[Alexis]

wow, for the first time since the election was announced martin is leading harper in the headlines. he beat him to the punch on his daily bullet point of election promises. and look what it took. wow. i never thought i'd hear the words ban and gun used in the same sentence. thank god this isn't the good ol us of a.

i'm not against affordable housing, but doesn't it just increase the geographical footprint of the ghettoization spiral?

[AD]

when will the liberals be releasing their platform?

ad

It seems as if the Cons/Libs/NDP are releasing their platforms in pieces and keeping the rest of it a secret. On CBC Sunday (I think) the NDP person said that we could expect their platform in the next week. So your guess is as good as mine.

It would be nice if they would all do it at the same time. The whole 'bits and pieces' method seems like gamesmanship to me. I want a clear picture of what the parties are about, and not back-and-forth talk responding to each other. They should respond to the voters and not worry about what the other parties are doing. Of course this will never change.

Oh yeah: We're in an election campaign. Release your platforms already!

AD

[d_rawk]

i'm not against affordable housing, but doesn't it just increase the geographical footprint of the ghettoization spiral?

It could, but doesn't need to. The implementation is important.

Co-op housing is great for this, because it addresses that very issue even within a structure by structure basis. Unfortunately it has been demonized because of politically opportunistic "convenient" misunderstandings of what it actually is. (Thinking back to years ago when Layton and Chow were villified for living in co-op housing, constantly portrayed as though they were receiving rent subsidies and ignoring the fact that what they were doing was being responsible and voluntarily subsidizing lower income families by paying higher-than-market prices through their participation). The federal government began withdrawing federal support in '92 and Ontario ended its program in '95 after heavy lobbying of Mike Harris by the FRPO (a lobbyist organization representing the interests of landlords).

[d_rawk]

Damn SES -- the nightly tracking is like crack

I'm impressed with how well the CPC has been running its' campaign. They've definately learned a thing or two since the last go-around.

[Alexis]

polls schmolls really...and i'm not saying that because my perceived side (i don't have a side) is losing. if layton listened to polls he wouldn't have kept the stache.

i like the idea of bit by bit platform release. it gives people time to discuss and reflect. if everyone dropped their bombs all at the same time, i think it would overwhelm a public who doesn't really care enough to sift through 4-5 platforms.

and i'm a big fan of co op housing. I grew up in a co op apartment buidling. it was a community within a community. lots of kids, great park, baseballs field, ice skating, pool, an apt set aside as a place for teens to go and hang out, the "teen centre". everyone put in i think 6 or 10 hours a month on various committees doing what they liked, maintenance, babysitting (for people while they put in their hours), membership, security, lanscaping, supervising youth activities. everyone helped out, everyone knew one another. putting in the time to the place you lived made people feel proud. it was a great place to live and grow up. the architecture of the building was unique and so was the way of life within it. there may have been some affordable housing units within the building but i could never tell the difference really. kids are kids. thinking back i did hear the words mothers allowance used to describe some people but when you're 8, you don't really know what that means. too bad the housing market turned so great and you could get a mortgage cheaper than rent in 93ish. everyone moved out, couldn't meet the mortgage and cmhc bought it out. now they just rent apts out, and that sense of community is gone.

[d_rawk]

Absolutely. There is more to the disappearance than the housing market, I think. The demand on the still existing co-ops is tremendous ... they can not accomodate all the applicants, of either the lower-income or higher-income side.

Not to pick on the Liberals, but they have played the demonize co-ops game as hard as anyone else.

From the last election:

For nearly 15 years, Jack Layton's political opponents have being trying to smear him on the basis that he and his family once lived in a housing co-op. Every time they do, the false allegation that he was somehow cheating the system are thoroughly refuted. Unfortunately, that doesn't stop the same falsehoods from being brought up again and again.

Now that Mr. Layton is increasing his visibility and popularity on the national stage and becoming a real threat to the political status quo, his opponents are again working overtime in trying to smear him. The smear was recently posted on MP Dennis Mills' website and, last week, it was read on air after one of your listeners raised it. Frankly, I'm disappointed in The House for reading a defamatory letter that was plainly incorrect in its accusations.

One of the impressive innovative aspects of co-op housing is that it is DESIGNED to be a mixed-income community. Ghettoizing low-income people has never worked; co-ops do. Jack Layton paid full market rent when he lived in the co-op, and received no government subsidy. His membership in the co-op did not deny housing to a single low-income person.

It seems that his political opponents cannot understand why someone who could afford to live in more luxurious accommodations would instead choose to live in a modest apartment in a community that features a wide diversity of incomes and backgrounds. But Jack Layton did and, frankly, I think that its something of which he can be justifiably proud. For your correspondent to indicate that it illustrates a lack of ethics to live in a co-op betrays the most curious definition of "ethics" that I've ever heard.

[ggrtrhhrtgg]

i particularly like the quote from walter mcintyre.. so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so true.

[color:purple]ya, so lets all vote conservative, because you know they are definitely going to be putting money into our community centres... for sure, no really, they will.

[hamilton]

is the gun the criminal?

what's next?

a total ban on baseball bats? kitchen cleavers? scissors?

will john doe be required to hose down the forming icicles on his garage eaves trough, simply because they're "dangerous"? c'mon.

Baseball bats, kitchen cleavers and scissors all have non-assault-related purposes. Handguns are made for only one purpose: to kill people.

Having said that, I don't actually think a ban on handguns would be effective. However, even if it is ineffective, I'm not opposed to banning them anyway.

[Birdy]

well, in the least, i would say they're the most family orientated party we have on the table. to me, a focus on family structure is more important than community centres.. but as a close second, i'll take the community centre.

i was just praising that walter guy as he recognizes the importance some kind of stable "structure" plays in the formation of a "good" person.

i'm drunk.

[Birdy]

oops.. that post was in response to numerodos.

[ollie]

well, in the least, i would say they're the most family orientated party we have on the table.

Atomic family oriented, yeah.

[Birdy]

is the gun the criminal?

what's next?

a total ban on baseball bats? kitchen cleavers? scissors?

will john doe be required to hose down the forming icicles on his garage eaves trough' date=' simply because they're "dangerous"? c'mon.

[/quote']

Baseball bats, kitchen cleavers and scissors all have non-assault-related purposes. Handguns are made for only one purpose: to kill people.

Having said that, I don't actually think a ban on handguns would be effective. However, even if it is ineffective, I'm not opposed to banning them anyway.

true.. i guess i'm just opposed to the idea of "banning".. making things "illegal" tempts the tempted even more.

[d_rawk]

Plus, banning something that is, for all intents and purposes, already banned ... is ...

*sigh*

I give up.

It's an election. Things don't need to make sense - just look or feel good, I guess.

[Birdy]

Atomic family oriented, yeah.

true.. but at least it's some type of family orientation.

[Birdy]

i love election time.. i just wish the average canadian would get as fired up as some of the people on this board would.. things could get interesting!

[bradm]

I, for one, would love to see a party focus on the family structure, to help Canada answer such questions as:

• What are the family structures currently in place in Canada?
  
• How have the structures of families been changing over the past, say, 10, 20, and 30 years?
  
• How do the changes correlate with changes in, say, immigration, economic changes (e.g., rising and falling industries), media portrayals, etc.?
  
• Beyond the "traditional" family structure (married man + woman, with kids), what other structures are possible?
  
• Can government's definition of marriage (and, implicitly, "family") be used to affect positive social change?
  
• If it can, which family structures could/should be supported by government (including legal definitions of family and marriage, along with taxation, benefits, etc.).
  

That list of questions can easily be expanded.

Saying the CPC is "focus[ed] the family structure" is, to me, not quite accurate. They're fixated on preserving the limited/exclusive (and excluding) definition of marriage, independent what's good or bad for people and society (or, at least, without telling anybody why that limited/exclusive [and excluding] definition is best for society).

Aloha,

Brad

[Birdy]

why would you 'hate' to ask? seriously?

i'm just trying to say that it's important for us to recognize the importance of family, any type of family, as the acting agent in forming values. Values, which i think, should fall on a family's shoulders, and not a government's, to form.

is that so offensive?