GenVibe - Community for Pontiac Vibe Enthusiasts

So, I read today that Jean Chretien stepped down last Friday after 10 years as Canada's PM, and Paul Martin took over.What are our Canadian member's feelings on this? Did you prefer the former PM? Are you pleased by the change in leadership?

For me, it is like changing 4 quarter for 1$.Both sucks...But IMHO, Paul say less stupid things then Ti-Jean, but he is more hypocrite.

IMHO, Canada should be counting it's blessings that it hasn't had to face the wrath of President Shrub.Seems every country he sets foot in falls apart...

at least bush will be gone soon enough...so, is the PM like the equivilant of the president of canada?

Quote, originally posted by drunkenvibe »at least bush will be gone soon enough...Man I hope so!

there is no way in hell he will get re-elected, what positive actions has he been responsible for???all i know is that things were way better under clinton! he would have whipped it out and made saddam give him a BJ! i think the limit of terms in office should be revised...

Quote, originally posted by drunkenvibe »there is no way in hell he will get re-elected, what positive actions has he been responsible for???Agreed, but far too many people find what he has done good for us. God knows how. But preliminary polls show if the election were held now, he stood a good chance of being reelected.Quote »all i know is that things were way better under clinton!I agree 100%!Quote » he would have whipped it out and made saddam give him a BJ! i think the limit of terms in office should be revised...Hmm...not so sure about that one...

I was watching the swearing in on TV this morning. They were saying probably there will be an election in the spring.

Oh god yes I'm glad he's gone. Everything he did was to benefit himself or his friends. The amount of government waste under his reign was unbelievable and nobody was ever accountable. My blood is boiling just thinking about it. The new PM is more of a moderate conservative, but he's still a politition.

President Shrub...heh heh...good one. If he gets re-elected because he went to Baghdad for Thanksgiving I'll be pissed...

Quote, originally posted by Kari »If he gets re-elected because he went to Baghdad for Thanksgiving I'll be pissed...If he gets re-elected PERIOD, I'm becoming a Canadian!

Quote, originally posted by Kari »President Shrub...heh heh...good one. It's funny because some nobody that works for the Sask Gov't got fired because they drafted a letter addressed to President Shrub. I'll see if I can dig up a link on that. Wow that was easy! Here's some fodder: http://sask.cbc.ca/regional/se...0731 and http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/Arti...anada Anyway, it seems that Paul is trying to bring the west on board, naming Ralph Goodale as finance minister. JC has alientated us, so I think Paul is just trying to kiss Ralph Klein's (removed). (he's the Premier of Alberta)

I don't think Paul Martin gives a rat's behind about Ralphy boy... they aren't even the same political party. I think Paul is trying to "sooth" the westerners in general.

Quote, originally posted by ragingfish »So, I read today that Jean Chretien stepped down last Friday after 10 years as Canada's PM, and Paul Martin took over.What are our Canadian member's feelings on this? Did you prefer the former PM? Are you pleased by the change in leadership?Actually Jean Chretien stepped down today and handed in his official resignation, not last Friday.I once had dinner at a restaurant that Paul Martin was also having dinner at. He seems pretty popular. I think Chretien's time had come and gone long ago. For some reason I don't see Paul Martin as PM yet, but I think once there is an election and he is elected that way, it will seem more real. Because we all know, he's most likely going to be elected in the next election. The "new" conservative party won't have their act together in time to mount a real challenge, I don't think.

I for one am very glad that Paul Martin is the new Prime Minister, he actually represents our riding ( Lasalle ) and he has been super popular here....my wife can remember him speaking to them in high school and all the locals have seen him around our city even though he doesn't reside here, very friendly and down to earth. Mr. Chretien has done his time and it's good that he finally retires! I am hoping for a lot of good things from Mr. Martin, now lets see if he delivers!

LOL I can go for some pizza right now......maybe Mr. Martin will give us some tax breaks so I can buy some

Well with Mr. Martin you will understand him....I know he will try to smooth things out between our 2 countries Thank God for that!

Quote, originally posted by silverawd26 »Tax breaks are awesome. Bush right now has been giving tax cuts left and right. Watch out, Silver, you are going to be accused of being rich! LOL. Oh no, the dreaded tax cuts! Oh, oh, what are we going to do, they're actually working! Oh no! The economy is experiencing growth----crap, crap, crap. Just like when Reagan made it work 20 years ago! People might actually realize that when the government stops playing "Robin Hood" with our money and lets those who go out and earn it keep it, the economy works better! Crap, what are we going to do? Good thing most Americans don't understand the intracacies of economics and we can lull them back into ignorace in a few years! The Democratic Party is much too fragmented right now to be able to produce an electible candidate in time for the next election. I'm glad Howard Dean is the Dem's leading candidate. He stands way too far to the left to win a national election, especially given the current political trends. (Just saw on tv the other day a Gallup Poll that showed that most teenagers in the U.S. today are more politically conservative than their parents are--I guess there IS a light on the horizon.) A Dean presidency would be a disaster right now and I am confident that most people in America will be able to discern this. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that Bush is any kind of political savior by any means, but I am very grateful that he is President instead of many of the others.

Question for my American cousins here on the board:DO you agree that relations between our two governements have been cool at best in a few years since Bush took over? I really hope with a new PM that that will change!

I don't know that a new PM is going to help - I think Bush is just general cool towards Canada because we expressed an opinion different from his. But thats just my thoughts on it.

I don't remember US-Canadian relations being notably warm even during the Clinton years, even when there was a "lefty" at the helm of each respective nation. A lot of this probably started during the Reagan administration when Reagan refused to listen to the Canadian PM at the time (I forget his name but I remember his face) regarding environmental issues---trans-boarder acid rain and its' causes in particular. It was made into a big deal at the time.Chretien was a nut and it would have served no real purpose for he and Bush to have held a meeting. They clashed on just about every issue and it would have been a waste of both of their time. Bush had bigger things in the world to worry about than Chretien's personal greivances with him.Also, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes at the highest levels of the Canadian and American governments. They have actually been interacting quite well for many years now. That is why I found it somewhat surprising for Chretien to have made public outbursts like he did against G.W. Just makes him look like another liberal pushing his agenda at all costs. Poor decision, it ultimately cost him his job. Anyway, our 2 governments interact perfectly on many levels and I really saw no real change in this in the aftermath of the Bush-Chretien issues. The "Eschlon" program that both of our governments deny the existance of has been moving along just fine (that's the program by which the NSA spies on our own people everyday by intercepting and combing through telephone conversations and most other electronic communications among other things--they must have one hell of a file on me!). Also, the NSA (National Security Administration) covers both countries equally, as its' main purpose is to secure all of North America, not just the U.S. In fact, its' center of operations is located in Canada because what they do there is against many American laws and rights. They put it in Canada to avoid some legal issues in the event that what they are really doing is exposed. In actuality, our governments get along quite well, just our figureheads were not seeing eye to eye on current events. There's really not much to worry about, I don't even consider it a real issue.

Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe »I don't remember US-Canadian relations being notably warm even during the Clinton years, Clinton and Chretien got along quite well and are actually friends from what I saw on a TV Show detailing Chretien's political life.

Well that's scary enough. Well then, the two of them can embrace each other as they fade into the annals of forgotten time.

Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe »Watch out, Silver, you are going to be accused of being rich! stang, get the hell out of my head!!! i am at the bottom of the food chain, no benefits for me (that i am aware of).do you think the "trickle down" theory has a basis in reality, stang?

LOL!Yes, I absolutely believe that supply-side economics (or "trickle-down") works well for the American economy--as long as there is not too much government meddling in it. My jaw almost hit the floor in one of my econ classes a few semesters ago when the prof introduced the system of supply-side economics. He showed us how and why it works and brought all the numbers from government sources to prove it. It worked in the 80's on into the 90's when it got ruined. Somewhat re-implemented in 2001 with the tax breaks. It's starting to work again, check out the stock market and mutual fund growth over the past few weeks. You've got to ignore the big spike in market growth since yesterday because it is related to Saddam's capture, not economic policy.Did you know that when Reagan took office in Jan. 1981 the tax rate on the "wealthy" was 90%? I think that applied to everyone earning $110K per year or more. In his first year in office, Reagan was able to get that cut down to like 65%. And it worked! The downside to it is that it doesn't work right away, it takes a few years to kick in.