Tuesday, 19 April 2011

Harper Hitler Photo

Harper Hitler

Online voting and renewing our democracy

It makes sense that Canada's political opposition to democratic renewal in a problem. If they were happy with the way people express themselves in the last election just 2.5 years ago would not be in the middle of another choice now. Furthermore, compared with best practice elsewhere, democracy is incomplete in Canada: a legislative body does not respond to people and, for more than a decade, voters in three provinces in Canada have been growing significantly underrepresented in the House of Commons.
However, in its platform of "Respect and renewal of our democracy", the Liberal Party is silent on structural reforms, literally, would give more power to the people, but focuses on improving voter turnout at it easier to vote.
"It is time to harness its power to bring the electoral participation of citizens. A Liberal government will lead Elections Canada to develop an online voting option, from a pilot project for individuals serving overseas in the Canadian Armed Forces and the federal government, and higher-education students who live outside their districts of origin. The pilot of support from a broader discussion with Canadians on an online voting option for all voters. "

Nobody wants to look at love and reactionary or opposed to experimentation, but some tricks are bad ideas in their own right.
People can bank, and breaks in play online at secure sites. There is nothing particularly innovative about the online voting. In certain circumstances it may make sense. The broader rationale, however, should be debated.
If physical discomfort was a decisive factor in the participation of citizens, why are least fit three times more likely to vote than young people? More importantly, it is really a step forward to make little effort to vote? Boil for the task of nanoseconds in a keyboard that looks more important to those who do not care now? Finally, a nanosecond is all that a democracy needs its citizens?
The most daunting, difficult - and important - in the performance of our duty is to decide whom to vote - something that is easy to avoid, even during the three hours that employers are obliged to give in to vote. Walk or drive to the polling station, however, creates its own sense of urgency and challenges the brain to think about their civic responsibility and what we hope to make our politicians.
It also goes to the polls is a social movement time. It forces us to think about what they are there, with others, do. Sitting at a computer in a game of sweat suit with a software program Elections Canada or the CBC Vote compass is simply not enough.

anada’s management question: majority, coalition or minority government ?

So are the times just in Canada that a national election is actually being fought on the size of the prize.
With rare vehemence, Stephen Harper, said that unless the Conservatives achieving a "stable national majority" Canada will face a Liberal-NDP coalition backed by the separatist Bloc Quebecois. Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff said Saturday, in a written statement and a press conference. His rejection has two problems: (1) not completed and (2) puts it in the position of defending the status quo adhockery minorities.
"Whoever leads the party that wins most seats in the election day must be called to form the government," Ignatieff said. "If that's the Liberal Party, then you need to find quickly the confidence of the newly elected Parliament. If our government can not win the support of the House, then Mr. Harper called to form a government and face the same challenge. That is our Constitution. It is the law of the land. "
He described the coalition as "a legitimate constitutional option," but pledged to work with other parties on an issue by issue. "
The reverse takeover stressed lined up what is most likely to happen: the Conservatives win more seats and more votes. The choice of your statement is what keeps almost exactly what almost took place in the winter of 2008. Instead of approving a Speech from the Throne and wait six weeks, Ignatieff was released to a confidence vote immediately on a victorious minority Harper to form a coalition / agreement with the NDP. The Governor General is conceivable you could use it to form a government if it could not support stable fashion for at least one opposition party of another.
Of course, Ignatieff carry out other press conferences and can promise to give a new Harper government reasonable time to govern and keep praising the virtue of multi-party minority government of multiple crises.
But instead of speculating about what the leaders can say to each other, and the Governor General, after the elections, we will re-elections and the people.
A formal coalition Liberal-NDP coalition against Harper's Conservatives would give voters direct power to elect a clear winner. Democracy and governance would be strengthened. A center-left coalition would be taken seriously simple and would be legitimate, if the Liberals and the NDP recognizes the option now.
However, both Ignatieff, Jack Layton and are formally a campaign to win outright to be the next prime minister, that the minority government work. Ignatieff enthusiastically in the register of Lester Pearson's minority governments in the sixties.
The possibility of another minority government can sound better than the prospect of a coalition government, but not necessarily more attractive than the alternative-a stable majority. After three minorities in 1968, Canadians elected a majority of no-nonsense. The winner, Pierre Trudeau, was contemptuous of minorities Pearson hesitation, promised to strengthen and reform, and dared people to make a clear decision.
This year could be bad for Ignatieff to run as a liberal Pearson.

Mr Taleeb Noormohamed

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed has been Chief Executive Officer, President and CEO Serebra Learning Corp. since February 22, 2011. Mr. Noormohamed Serebra joined in July 2010 and served as a consultant until February 22, 2011. Serebra joined after helping deliver the successful Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter as Vice President, Strategy and Alliances. Mr. Noormohamed served in key positions in the Government of Canada and became a successful ... launch of an innovative entrepreneur online community dedicated to transforming the way students connect with teachers to learn. It has also managed business development for a leading solutions provider of online sales management, and founded and directed the e-business strategy consulting for a global professional services organization. Mr. Noormohamed holds a BA from Princeton University and did his doctoral work at the University of Oxford.

Canadian Party Leaders' Debate

Ignatieff .. seems like he has great potential. But he is attacked both as a harpist and deflects criticism difficult, looks nervous. I question the wisdom of attacking Layton Layton Ignatieff because he will not get a minority, and attacks Ignatieff is also potentially swinging for Harper .. Jack: I know Ignatieff represents a party that knows .. not really far to the left .. but .. coalition of left! or merger! otherwise it will be perpetually fragmented left .. and Harper remains in power ...

Why does Duceppe never have the opportunity to speak? But yes, this debate is not what peripheral platforms of each party are, I do not know what each are running for.

I would lose my job if I was as helpless as if Harper is to explain my actions.
that are screwed in politics in Canada.
Democracy? Where?

Ignatieff sounds like John Kerry. Harper appears as a more intelligent, sinister version of Bush. We need an NDP majority government. Jack Layton is slack in the attack on the left, it apears that `s in Harper` s sides, and many of us know this, but I guarantee you will be misunderstood by the general population. The left has to stay together.
This country is at its best when it `s been the center left, period. We have health for all, and many social support programs. Everyone uses social programs, children, parents, old, rich or poor, and are attractive to new citizens.

Basically, Harper's vision of democracy is not right. I mean, I have fear that it could have the majority, I do not want that type at the head of a conservative majority in our country, I mean, virtualy, which could almost be a dictator, and I'm glad you did not realize that sewing otherwish that would be dramatic.
Therefore, all persons who were not informed in politics and stuff (because our education system is so slow): Friends, only ..... Harper simply do not vote, please, love for our country.

I would characterize the relationship between Stalin and Hitler as "frenemies. Also, there Layton and Ignatieff are characterized as Hitler and Stalin, the comparison is not commensurate. To be clear: I think it is plausible that the National Development Plan could lead to results more favorable than the Harper government. But, realistically, it is unlikely that in this election the NDP to come out on top. (However, contrary to its interpretation does not mean that voting NDP supports the Conservatives.)

The idea that the enemy of my enemy is my friend is simply wrong. Stalin and Hitler were my enemies. I will not side with Stalin just because he was against Hitler.
We can strengthen the National Development Plan, and make only stop a Conservative majority government.
I am not against a coalition, I think they are a big part of our parliamentary democracy. I am, however, against the idea that voting for the NDP in any way supports the Conservatives, it is 100% wrong.

The pressing problem instigating this election: to bring Harper down. What is the point in throwing knives at Ignatieff, strategically knives (I) should be saved for Harper. Is not Juan and Miguel on the same side in this regard? Your enemy is my enemy because you are my friend. Why do not we get along (and form a coalition)?

Sunday, 10 April 2011

Leaders of The Liberal Party - About Michael Ignatieff

Michael has been fighting for equal opportunities since his student days. As a young man, he campaigned for Lester Pearson and Pierre Trudeau.

Is a leader who listens. Since being elected to Parliament, Michael has traveled to every province and territory, sharing his vision with Canadians in communities large and small.

Wherever he goes, Michael is involved Canadians in a conversation about our future. Your message has been one of hope together we can build a stronger Canada for our families.
Canadian author, human rights expert Michael Ignatieff is the political leader of the opposition Liberal Party of Canada. Shortly after the coalition between the New Democrats, the Bloc Quebecois and the Liberals suspension was overturned by the successful Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Parliament until January 2009, Liberal leader Stephane Dion, announced his resignation. Ignatieff was one of three candidates to take over the party leadership, but the other two candidates, Dominic LeBlanc and Bob Rae, announced that they would fall out of the race on December 8 and 9, two conversations respectively.1 Election increased after the liberal acceptance of a plan of conservative budget in late January 2009.

As leader of the Liberal Party, Michael Ignatieff sets the tone. We keep hearing about how you take the road and all that.

Well, I do not think that is true, as revealed in the way that Michael Ignatieff called Stephen Harper (Conservatives and other) evil:

Speaking to a Stampede breakfast crowd of about 150 to kick off a summer tour bus across Canada, Ignatieff said Prime Minister Stephen Harper, suggesting that the conservative is the extreme right of most Canadians.

"We are the center of progressive reform in Canada. I can not emphasize how much they are in the middle," he told supporters.

"You know that smell the smell of sulfur from the type (Harper) - right to know these guys really are."

The joke of sulfur is not ambiguous. Is a clear reference to Satan, the prince of darkness, the embodiment of evil Canadians who share a Christian heritage. For Canadians, whose background is different, the model of sulfur is easy to understand, as the Christian devil is a common enough to become almost secular.

Is this what you really think Michael Ignatieff? Or is it a comment script? I think it's the first, if only because Michael Ignatieff talks about "this man" and "these kids." Such informality seems genuine. I believe that Michael Ignatieff is talking about the band, and reveals his true feelings.

Michael Ignatieff is unplugged. Michael Ignatieff, Stephen Harper, believed to be the devil himself.

Stephen Harper is not bad. This is not a philosophical difference of opinion between Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff.

Stephen Harper is evil.

And apparently I'm too bad, being one of "these kids."

Not long ago, the Liberal Party got in trouble when he published a photo showing Stephen Harper was fired after being featured in a contest whose prize was a t-shirt of the Liberal Party. Liberal apologists said that the people running the competition and the maintenance of the website is "asleep at the switch", which is patently false. It is clear that people who build web pages are awake and know what they are doing.

But now I understand why these people thought making a picture, Stephen Harper, his assassination was appropriate for a competition, and appropriate for online publication. As I said, Michael Ignatieff sets the tone, and if in public, speaking extemporaneously, he can say without shame that Stephen Harper is the devil himself, I can only imagine what it says on the office, out of sight of the cameras, surrounded by fellow liberals.

That kind of talk is filtered down and each one takes the example of her. Michael Ignatieff did not personally approve of publishing a picture of Stephen Harper has skyrocketed. And there would (hopefully) if it had been requested, but only because he would have realized that it would have been a bad political move.

That would have been the only reason for not publishing it, however. Anyone working in that atmosphere Stephen-Harper-is-the Devil would not think the picture itself was inappropriate in a moral sense. If Stephen Harper is evil, then the fact shown in the photograph is a moral good. It should be. And so the image was posted by people who are not as subtle as other liberals who understand that a moral good, as the destruction of bad things could still be politically costly if not sent a message.

I do not believe that Michael Ignatieff is bad, nor do I believe that liberals in general are bad, either. This despite Michael Ignatieff published articles in support of torture, and this despite the Liberal Party members still being punished for stealing public money on the sponsorship scandal.

I think evil is a real thing, and that call evil someone is a serious accusation. Few people, in my opinion, the increase to that level of moral turpitude to be truly evil. But if I'm wrong, it probably would not be able to recognize.

How wrong do you understand? If Stephen Harper is the devil, what about his wife, Laura? Is too bad, or just a hapless victim, as Rosemary Woodhouse in Rosemary's Baby? And what of the two, Stephen Harper, of children? If properly called Devilspawn?

better ideaTasha Kheiriddin has its version of "sulfur", Stephen Harper, the smell, and rightly points out that "the comparison of the prime minister to the Lord of the Underworld is the kind of blow under the left-wing bloggers take, not a comment line with the leader the "Liberal Party, and perhaps expose Michael Ignatieff was common sense or trying to impress his listeners with intelligent control of the metaphor.

Things, Stephen Harper can not get away with it: I do not like "what if" scenarios, but let's be frank. If Stephen Harper had said the same about Michael Ignatieff, we would be inundated with a flood of statements, the main stream media experts nationwide to fund at least read liberal blogger who was "proof" Stephen Harper is a Christian fundamentalist with a hidden agenda. But not heard, Stephen Harper, saying things like this. Perhaps practicing Christians know better than to accuse someone of being reckless "evil" because they know that evil is a bit of laughter, although there are examples of demagogues who claim to religious knowledge seem to forget this. But when it comes to cheapen the word by overuse it, is that atheists are the worst, because for some reason are allowed to get away with it.
In the House of Commons, Michael has led the fight for gender equality. His own law of private law, C-471, recognizes a human right to equal pay for work of equal value.

It has been proposed innovative new Liberal policy to strengthen our pensions and health, to help families care for their loved ones at home, and to give every child a fair chance to the promises of Canadian life, from preschool to post-secondary education.

As leader of a Liberal extraordinary team, Michael has led to the priorities of working families to Parliament, driven by its belief that equal opportunity is what makes Canada great, and that together we can lead the world again.

Throughout his career, Michael has been a champion of freedom and democracy around the world. As a journalist witnessed the aftermath of the genocide in Rwanda, the chaos of the former Yugoslavia, and the shadow of tyranny in Iran. As Canada's representative to the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, Michael was a pioneer in the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect, which has since been adopted by the United Nations. He is the author of 17 books and has received 11 honorary doctorates, a Gemini Award and the Governor General's Award for nonfiction.

Zsuzsanna husband, father of Theo and Sophie, a passion for Canada and a world class leader - Michael Ignatieff is working to get your family, your future and priorities in the middle of the next government of Canada.

Au Liberal Party Leader Tony Abbott Leader of the Opposition

Tony Abbott was elected to Warringah in the elections in March 1994. Before entering Parliament he was Executive Director of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy 1993-94. From 1990-1993 he was press secretary and political adviser to opposition leader, Dr John Hewson. His previous career was in journalism, he wrote a reporter of 'The Bulletin' and 'The Australian'.

Tony Abbott became leader of the opposition Leader of the Liberal Party of Australia Au, December 1, 2009

In the election of the Howard government in 1996 was appointed Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. In this position he was responsible for creating the successful program for youth Greencorps.

After the 1998 elections was appointed to the new portfolio of Minister for Employment Services. As Minister, he oversaw the development of the network and a major expansion of Work for the Dole.

In January 2001, Tony was promoted to Cabinet as Minister of Employment, the leader of the Liberal Party of Labour Relations and Small Business. After the 2001 elections was appointed Minister of Employment and Workplace Relations, the leader of the Liberal Party of Australia Leader of the House and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister of Civil Service

Tony was appointed Minister of Health and Ageing on 7 October 2003.

After the election in 2007, Tony became Shadow Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and the Voluntary Sector, followed by the shadow Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. In December 2009 he became leader of the opposition. He has written two books in defense of the existing constitutional system, "The Monarchy minimum" and "How to win the constitutional war." In 2009 he released his latest book Battlelines.


St. Ignatius Riverview

The University of Sydney

* Economics / Law
* First Grade Rugby
* President of the SRC

Rhodes Scholar, Oxford University

* MA, Politics and Philosophy
* Won two blue boxing
* St. Patrick's Seminary, Manly